Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research (Aug 2024)

Comparison between the lowest instrumented vertebrae L3 with the use of direct vertebrae rotation (DVR) and the lowest instrumented vertebrae L4 for non-DVR in adolescents with idiopathic scoliosis Lenke 5C/6C: when LEV is L4

  • Emmanuel Alonge,
  • Gengming Zhang,
  • HongQi Zhang,
  • Chaofeng Guo

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13018-024-04961-z
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 19, no. 1
pp. 1 – 8

Abstract

Read online

Abstract Objective As there are no substantial selection criteria for determining the lowest instrumented vertebra (LIV) in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) Lenke 5C/6C, thus, many surgeons base their selection on experience. The study aims to compare the selection of the lowest instrumented vertebrae (LIV) lumbar vertebra three (L3) with the use of direct vertebrae rotation (DVR) to the lowest instrumented vertebrae (LIV) lumbar vertebra four (L4) with the use of non-DVR for the correction of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) Lenke 5C/6C when the lower end vertebrae (LEV) is at lumbar vertebrae four (L4). Methods This prospective study involved 101 patients who were divided into two groups based on different techniques. The patients were prospectively followed up for at least four years. All patients included in the study had a lower end vertebra (LEV) at L4, while patients older than 18 years and patients with prior surgical procedures were excluded. The DVR group consisted of 49 patients, and the non-DVR group included 51 patients. Results The preoperative mean LIV disc angle was 3.1 ± 3 and 3.1 ± 1, P = 0.097, which corrected to 1.2 ± 0 and 1.1 ± 0 in both groups at 4-year follow-up without statistical significance. The LIVDA and LIVT were statistically insignificant at the preoperative, and there were no significant differences at the follow-up visitation. The DVR group achieved a satisfactory coronal and Cobb’s angle correction compared to the NDVR group; however, there were no statistical differences at the follow-up visitations. Both groups achieve a satisfactory correction rate without substantial significance in clinical and radiological outcomes. Furthermore, no post-surgical complications were recorded in either group. Conclusions DVR is suitable for selecting L3 as the LIV in AIS Lenke 5C/6C compared to L4 in non-DVR. DVR preserved more segments without substantial complications during the follow-up visitations. Nevertheless, both groups will continue to be followed up to prevent adding-on post-surgical complications.

Keywords