Analysis of instrumentation/fusion survivorship without reoperation after primary posterior multiple anchor instrumentation and arthrodesis for idiopathic scoliosis

作者：Asher Marc A^*; Lai Sue Min; Burton Douglas C

来源：Spine Journal, 2010, 10(1): 5-15.

DOI：10.1016/j.spinee.2009.08.460

• Idiopathic scoliosis
• Surgery
• Arthrodesis
• Instrumentation
• Survivorship

BACKGROUND: During the past 25 years, spinal instrumentation systems and surgical techniques used to treat idiopathic scoliosis have evolved, achieving fewer patient restrictions during arthrodesis healing, shorter constructs, and better correction. The purposes of this retrospective comparative study were to determine the survivorship of the implant/fusion without reoperation and the risk factors influencing such survival.
METHODS: From 1989 through 2002, 208 consecutive patients (index patient included, age 10-20 years) underwent primary posterior instrumentation and arthrodesis with the same multiple anchor implant system by one surgeon, a co-designer of the system. Two hundred seven were followed for more than 2 years; reoperation status was available for them at an average follow-up of 8.3 years. Twenty-one independent demographic, deformity, instrumentation, and process variables possibly influencing the need for reoperation were studied by comparing the reoperated group with the unreoperated group.
RESULTS: Nineteen patients (9.2%) had reoperation; 16 (7.7%) were for indications related to posterior spine instrumentation. Survival of the implant/fusion without reoperation for spine instrumentation-related indications was 96% (95% confidence interval [CI], 93.2-98.7%) at 5 years, 91.6% (95% CI, 86.9-96.3%) at 10 years, 87.1% (95% CI, 79.5-94.6%) at 15 years, and 73.7% (95% CI, 48.6-98.6%) at 16 years, when the number at risk was nine. Reoperation need was significantly influenced by two implant variables: transverse connector design (p=.0012) and the lower instrumented vertebra anchors used (p=.0004). At 9 years, the longest interval allowing comparison, survival of the implant/fusion without reoperation for these two variables was 100% (six subjects at risk) compared to 82% (95% CI, 74.2-90.3%) with 59 patients still at risk for reoperation for those who did not have them, p=.0014.
CONCLUSIONS: The most stable lower instrumented vertebra anchor configuration, bilateral pedicle screws, and the stronger transverse connector design, closed drop entry, provided the best survival of the implant/fusion without reoperation with this system and the techniques used at 9-year follow-up. We hope that this post-market study using survivorship techniques will be a guide for studies of other spinal implants.

• 出版日期2010-1