TY - JOUR
T1 - Combined Anterior Thoracic Vertebral Body Tethering and Posterior Lumbar Tethering Results in Quicker Return to Sport and Activity Compared to Posterior Spinal Instrumented Fusion in Patients with Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis
AU - Oeding, Jacob F.
AU - Siu, Jeremy
AU - O’Donnell, Jennifer
AU - Wu, Hao Hua
AU - Allahabadi, Sachin
AU - Saggi, Satvir
AU - Flores, Michael
AU - Brown, Kelsey
AU - Baldwin, Avionna
AU - Diab, Mohammad
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© The Author(s) 2023.
PY - 2025/3
Y1 - 2025/3
N2 - Study Design: Retrospective comparative study. Objective: To compare patient-reported physical activity between anterior thoracic vertebral body tethering and posterior lumbar spine tethering (ATVBT/PLST) and posterior spinal instrumentation and fusion (PSIF) with minimum 2 year follow-up. Methods: Consecutive skeletally immature patients with idiopathic scoliosis and a thoracic and lumbar curve magnitude ≥40° who underwent either ATVBT/PLST or PSIF from 2015-2019 were included. The primary outcome was rate of returning to sport. Secondary outcomes included ability to bend and satisfaction with sport performance as well as weeks until return to sport, school, physical education (PE) classes, and running. Results: Ten patients underwent ATVBT/PLST and 12 underwent PSIF. ATVBT/PLST patients reported significantly faster return to sport (13.5 weeks vs 27.9 weeks, P =.04), running (13.3 weeks vs 28.8 weeks, P =.02), and PE class (12.6 weeks vs 26.2 weeks, P =.04) compared to PSIF patients. ATVBT/PLST patients reported that they had to give up activities due to their ability to bend at lower rates than PSIF patients while reporting “no changes” in their ability to bend after surgery at higher rates than PSIF patients (0% vs 4% giving up activities and 70% vs 0% reporting no changes in bending ability for ATVBT/PLST and PSIF, respectively, P =.01). Compared to PSIF patients, ATVBT/PLST patients experienced less main thoracic and thoracolumbar/lumbar curve correction at most recent follow-up (thoracic: 41 ± 19% vs 69 ± 18%, P =.001; thoracolumbar/lumbar: 59 ± 25% vs 78 ± 15%, P =.02). No significant differences in the number of revision surgeries were observed between ATVBT/PLST and PSIF patients (4 (40%) and 1 (8%) for ATVBT/PLST and PSIF, respectively, P =.221). Conclusions: ATVBT/PLST patients reported significantly faster rates of returning to sport, running, and PE. In addition, ATVBT/PLST patients were less likely to have to give up activities due to bending ability after surgery and reported no changes in their ability to bend after surgery more frequently than PSIF patients. However, the overall rate of return to the same or higher level of sport participation was high amongst both groups, with no significant difference observed between ATVBT/PLST and PSIF patients.
AB - Study Design: Retrospective comparative study. Objective: To compare patient-reported physical activity between anterior thoracic vertebral body tethering and posterior lumbar spine tethering (ATVBT/PLST) and posterior spinal instrumentation and fusion (PSIF) with minimum 2 year follow-up. Methods: Consecutive skeletally immature patients with idiopathic scoliosis and a thoracic and lumbar curve magnitude ≥40° who underwent either ATVBT/PLST or PSIF from 2015-2019 were included. The primary outcome was rate of returning to sport. Secondary outcomes included ability to bend and satisfaction with sport performance as well as weeks until return to sport, school, physical education (PE) classes, and running. Results: Ten patients underwent ATVBT/PLST and 12 underwent PSIF. ATVBT/PLST patients reported significantly faster return to sport (13.5 weeks vs 27.9 weeks, P =.04), running (13.3 weeks vs 28.8 weeks, P =.02), and PE class (12.6 weeks vs 26.2 weeks, P =.04) compared to PSIF patients. ATVBT/PLST patients reported that they had to give up activities due to their ability to bend at lower rates than PSIF patients while reporting “no changes” in their ability to bend after surgery at higher rates than PSIF patients (0% vs 4% giving up activities and 70% vs 0% reporting no changes in bending ability for ATVBT/PLST and PSIF, respectively, P =.01). Compared to PSIF patients, ATVBT/PLST patients experienced less main thoracic and thoracolumbar/lumbar curve correction at most recent follow-up (thoracic: 41 ± 19% vs 69 ± 18%, P =.001; thoracolumbar/lumbar: 59 ± 25% vs 78 ± 15%, P =.02). No significant differences in the number of revision surgeries were observed between ATVBT/PLST and PSIF patients (4 (40%) and 1 (8%) for ATVBT/PLST and PSIF, respectively, P =.221). Conclusions: ATVBT/PLST patients reported significantly faster rates of returning to sport, running, and PE. In addition, ATVBT/PLST patients were less likely to have to give up activities due to bending ability after surgery and reported no changes in their ability to bend after surgery more frequently than PSIF patients. However, the overall rate of return to the same or higher level of sport participation was high amongst both groups, with no significant difference observed between ATVBT/PLST and PSIF patients.
KW - adolescent idiopathic scoliosis
KW - fusionless surgery
KW - posterior spinal fusion
KW - return to sport
KW - vertebral body tethering
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=105001655182&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=105001655182&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1177/21925682231222887
DO - 10.1177/21925682231222887
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:105001655182
SN - 2192-5682
VL - 15
SP - 1068
EP - 1076
JO - Global Spine Journal
JF - Global Spine Journal
IS - 2
ER -