Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Bivertebral autostable claws for the proximal fixation in thoracic adolescent idiopathic scoliosis surgery

  • Case Series
  • Published:
Spine Deformity Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Study design

Retrospective monocentric study.

Objectives

To report radiologic outcomes of a consecutive series of AIS patients, operated with a bivertebral autostable claw for the upper instrumentation over a 5-year period.

Summary of background data

The upper fixation represents the weakest part of long constructs because of local anatomy and the high pull-out forces. Various implants have been proposed, but proximal junctional failures (PJF) and shoulder imbalance still occur with variable incidence. The autostable claw is a new implant, safe, and low profile, combining the mechanical strength of hooks with the initial stability of pedicle screws.

Methods

All AIS patients operated between January 2010 and July 2015 for a Lenke 1 or 2 curve with the bivertebral autostable claw were included. A minimum 2-year follow-up was required. Full-spine biplanar stereoradiographs were performed preoperatively, within 8 weeks postoperative and at latest examination. Local and global sagittal and coronal parameters were analyzed and complications were reported.

Results

237 patients (191 Lenke 1 and 46 Lenke 2) were included, with a mean follow-up of 4.1 ± 0.6 years. PJF occurred in 2 patients (0.8%), and radiologic PJKs were observed in 8.4% of the series. Shoulder balance was efficiently restored or maintained in 88.2%.

Conclusions

The bivertebral autostable claw is a safe and robust alternative to pedicle screws for proximal fixation in AIS long constructs. Compression and/or distraction can be applied to level shoulders, and mechanical failures remain rare at 4-year follow-up.

Level of evidence

IV.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Hu X, Siemionow KB, Lieberman IH (2014) Thoracic and lumbar vertebrae morphology in Lenke type 1 female adolescent idiopathic scoliosis patients. Int J Spine Surg. https://doi.org/10.14444/1030

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. Hassanzadeh H, Gupta S, Jain A et al (2013) Type of anchor at the proximal fusion level has a significant effect on the incidence of proximal junctional kyphosis and outcome in adults after long posterior spinal fusion. Spine Deform 1:299–305

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Ilharreborde B, Even J, Lefevre Y et al (2008) How to determine the upper level of instrumentation in Lenke types 1 and 2 adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: a prospective study of 132 patients. J Pediatr Orthop 28:733–739

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Lonner BS, Ren Y, Newton PO et al (2017) Risk factors of proximal junctional kyphosis in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis-the pelvis and other considerations. Spine Deform 5:181–188

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Kim YJ, Lenke LG, Bridwell KH et al (2007) Proximal junctional kyphosis in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis after 3 different types of posterior segmental spinal instrumentation and fusions: incidence and risk factor analysis of 410 cases. Spine 32:2731–2738

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Helgeson MD, Shah SA, Newton PO et al (2010) Evaluation of proximal junctional kyphosis in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis following pedicle screw, hook, or hybrid instrumentation. Spine 35:177–181

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Lee GA, Betz RR, Clements DH, Huss GK (1999) Proximal kyphosis after posterior spinal fusion in patients with idiopathic scoliosis. Spine 24:795–799

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Rhee JM, Bridwell KH, Won DS et al (2002) Sagittal plane analysis of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: the effect of anterior versus posterior instrumentation. Spine 27:2350–2356

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Uehara M, Takahashi J, Ikegami S et al (2017) Pedicle screw loosening after posterior spinal fusion for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis in upper and lower instrumented vertebrae having major perforation. Spine 42:1895–1900

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Senaran H, Shah SA, Gabos PG, Littleton AG, Neiss G, Guille JT (2008) Difficult thoracic pedicle screw placement in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. J Spinal Disord Tech 21:187–191

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Ilharreborde B, Sebag G, Skalli W, Mazda K (2013) Adolescent idiopathic scoliosis treated with posteromedial translation: radiologic evaluation with a 3D low-dose system. Eur Spine J 22:2382–2391

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Cordista A, Conrad B, Horodyski M et al (2006) Biomechanical evaluation of pedicle screws versus pedicle and laminar hooks in the thoracic spine. Spine J 6:444–449

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Cotrel Y, Dubousset J (1984) A new technic for segmental spinal osteosynthesis using the posterior approach. Rev Chir Orthop Reparatrice Appar Mot 70:489–494

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Roach JW, Ashman RB, Allard RN (1990) The strength of a posterior element claw at one versus two spinal levels. J Spinal Disord 3:259–261

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. van Laar W, Meester RJ, Smit TH, van Royen BJ (2007) A biomechanical analysis of the self-retaining pedicle hook device in posterior spinal fixation. Eur Spine J 16:1209–1214

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Mazda K, Ilharreborde B, Even J et al (2009) Efficacy and safety of posteromedial translation for correction of thoracic curves in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis using a new connection to the spine: the Universal Clamp. Eur Spine J 18:158–169

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Ilharreborde B, Even J, Lefevre Y et al (2010) Hybrid constructs for tridimensional correction of the thoracic spine in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: a comparative analysis of universal clamps versus hooks. Spine 35:306–314

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Ilharreborde B, Steffen JS, Nectoux E et al (2011) Angle measurement reproducibility using EOS three-dimensional reconstructions in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis treated by posterior instrumentation. Spine 36:E1306–E1313

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Maillot C, Ferrero E, Fort D et al (2015) Reproducibility and repeatability of a new computerized software for sagittal spinopelvic and scoliosis curvature radiologic measurements: Keops (®). Eur Spine J 24:1574–1581

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Glattes RC, Bridwell KH, Lenke LG et al (2005) Proximal junctional kyphosis in adult spinal deformity following long instrumented posterior spinal fusion: incidence, outcomes, and risk factor analysis. Spine 30:1643–1649

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Ferrero E, Ould-Slimane M, Gille O et al (2015) Sagittal spinopelvic alignment in 654 degenerative spondylolisthesis. Eur Spine J 24:1219–1227

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Zhang R-F, Liu K, Wang X et al (2015) Reliability of a new method for measuring coronal trunk imbalance, the axis-line-angle technique. Spine J 15:2459–2465

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Kuklo TR, Lenke LG, Graham EJ et al (2002) Correlation of radiographic, clinical, and patient assessment of shoulder balance following fusion versus nonfusion of the proximal thoracic curve in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Spine 27:2013–2020

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Lonner BS, Ren Y, Yaszay B et al (2018) Evolution of surgery for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis over 20 years: have outcomes improved? Spine 43:402–410

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Lowenstein JE, Matsumoto H, Vitale MG et al (2007) Coronal and sagittal plane correction in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: a comparison between all pedicle screw versus hybrid thoracic hook lumbar screw constructs. Spine 32:448–452

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Hwang SW, Samdani AF, Tantorski M et al (2011) Cervical sagittal plane decompensation after surgery for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: an effect imparted by postoperative thoracic hypokyphosis. J Neurosurg Spine 15:491–496

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Martin CT, Pugely AJ, Gao Y et al (2014) Increasing hospital charges for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis in the United States. Spine 39:1676–1682

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Newton PO, Yaszay B, Upasani VV et al (2010) Preservation of thoracic kyphosis is critical to maintain lumbar lordosis in the surgical treatment of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Spine 35:1365–1370

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Kwan MK, Chan CYW (2016) Is there an optimal upper instrumented vertebra (UIV) tilt angle to prevent post-operative shoulder imbalance and neck tilt in Lenke 1 and 2 adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) patients? Eur Spine J 25:3065–3074

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Matamalas A, Bagó J, D’Agata E, Pellisé F (2016) Does patient perception of shoulder balance correlate with clinical balance? Eur Spine J 25:3560–3567

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Kaur K, Singh R, Prasath V et al (2016) Computed tomographic-based morphometric study of thoracic spine and its relevance to anaesthetic and spinal surgical procedures. J Clin Orthop Trauma 7:101–108

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Ahmed SI, Bastrom TP, Yaszay B et al (2017) 5-year reoperation risk and causes for revision after idiopathic scoliosis surgery. Spine 42:999–1005

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Bago J, Sanchez-Raya J, Perez-Grueso FJS, Climent JM (2010) The Trunk Appearance Perception Scale (TAPS): a new tool to evaluate subjective impression of trunk deformity in patients with idiopathic scoliosis. Scoliosis 5:6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Raso VJ, Lou E, Hill DL et al (1998) Trunk distortion in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. J Pediatr Orthop 18:222–226

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Lee CS, Hwang CJ, Lim EJ et al (2016) A retrospective study to reveal factors associated with postoperative shoulder imbalance in patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis with double thoracic curve. J Neurosurg Pediatr 25:744–752

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Yang H, Im GH, Hu B et al (2017) Shoulder balance in Lenke type 2 adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: should we fuse to the second thoracic vertebra? Clin Neurol Neurosurg 163:156–162

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Metzger MF, Robinson ST, Svet MT et al (2016) Biomechanical analysis of the proximal adjacent segment after multilevel instrumentation of the thoracic spine: do hooks ease the transition? Glob Spine J 6:335–343

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Wang J, Zhao Y, Shen B et al (2010) Risk factor analysis of proximal junctional kyphosis after posterior fusion in patients with idiopathic scoliosis. Injury 41:415–420

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Ilharreborde B, Pesenti S, Ferrero E et al (2018) Correction of hypokyphosis in thoracic adolescent idiopathic scoliosis using sublaminar bands: a 3D multicenter study. Eur Spine J 27:350–357

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Ferrero E, Bocahut N, Lefevre Y et al (2018) Proximal junctional kyphosis in thoracic adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: risk factors and compensatory mechanisms in a multicenter national cohort. Eur Spine J 27:2241–2250

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Ghailane S, Pesenti S, Peltier E et al (2017) Posterior elements disruption with hybrid constructs in AIS patients: is there an impact on proximal junctional kyphosis? Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 137:631–635

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

None of the authors received financial support for this study.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Pediatric Orthopaedics, Robert Debré Hospital, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris (AP-HP), Paris Diderot University, 48 Bd Sérurier, 75019, Paris, France

    A. L. Simon, K. Mazda & B. Ilharreborde

  2. Department of Orthopaedic, Spine Surgery, Georges Pompidou European Hospital, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris (AP-HP), Paris Descartes University, 20-40 Rue Leblanc, 75908, Paris, France

    E. Ferrero

Authors
  1. A. L. Simon
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. E. Ferrero
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. K. Mazda
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. B. Ilharreborde
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to A. L. Simon.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

ALS (none), EF (none), KM (other from Implanet, outside the submitted work), BI (other from Implanet, Zimmer Biomet, and Medtronic, outside the submitted work).

IRB approval

Retrospective study approved by the Local Ethic Committee.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Simon, A.L., Ferrero, E., Mazda, K. et al. Bivertebral autostable claws for the proximal fixation in thoracic adolescent idiopathic scoliosis surgery. Spine Deform 8, 77–84 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s43390-020-00040-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s43390-020-00040-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation