title: Parameters leading to a successful radiographic outcome following surgical treatment for Lenke 2 curves.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  In Lenke 2 curves, there are conflicting data when to include the PTC into the fusion. Studies focusing on Lenke 2 curves are scant. The number of patients with significant postoperative shoulder height difference (SHD) or trunk shift (TS) is as high as 30 % indicating further research. Therefore, the purpose of the current study was to improve understanding of curve resolution and shoulder balance following surgical correction of Lenke 2 curves as well as the identification of radiographic parameters predicting postoperative curve resolution, shoulder and trunk balance in perspective of inclusion/exclusion of the proximal thoracic curve (PTC).
  
  
  METHODS
  This is a retrospective study of a 158 Lenke 2 curves. Serial radiographs were analyzed for the main thoracic curve (MTC), PTC, and lumbar curve (LC), SHD, clavicle angle (CA), T-1 tilt, deviation of the central sacral vertical line (CSVL) off the C7 plumb line.Patients were stratified whether the PTC was included in the fusion (+PTC group, n = 60) or not (-PTC group, n = 98). Intergroup results were studied. Compensatory mechanisms for SHD were studied in detail. Adding-on distally was defined as an increase of the lowest instrumented vertebra adjacent disc angle (LIVDA) >3°. Stepwise regression analyses were performed to establish predictive radiographic parameters.
  
  
  RESULTS
  At follow-up averaging 24 months significant differences between the +PTC and -PTC group existed for the PTC (24° vs 28°, p < .01), PTC correction (42 vs 29 %, p < .01), rate of MTC-loss >5° (27 vs 53 %, p < .01), and spontaneous LC correction in patients with a selective thoracic fusion (STF) (80/93 %, p = .04). The number of patients with a new trunk shift (CSVL > 2 cm) was 9 (6 %): 7 in the -PTC vs 2 in the +PTC group (p = .03). Utilization of compensatory mechanisms (99 vs 83 %, p < .01) and adding-on (35 vs 20 %, p < .05) occurred more often in the +PTC vs the -PTC groups. Statistics showed postoperative SHD improvement in both the +PTC and -PTC groups. There were no significant differences regarding SHD, CA and T1-Tilt between groups. However, only in the -PTC group, a significant change between postoperative and follow-up SHD existed (p = .02). Statistics identified a preoperative 'left shoulder up' (p < .01) and CSVL (p = .03) predictive for follow-up SHD ≥1.5 cm. A statistical model only for the -PTC group showed 9 parameters highly predictive for a follow-up SHD ≥1.5 cm with highest prediction strength for a PTC >40° (p = .01), a preoperative 'left shoulder up' (p < .01) and anterior fusion (p = .02). To account for baseline differences between the +PTC and -PTC groups, 49 matched-pairs were studied. Postoperative differences remained significant between the +PTC and -PTC groups for the PTC (p < .01), MTC (p = .03) and the rate of loss of MTC >5° (p < .01).
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Prediction of a successful surgical outcome for Lenke 2 curves depends on multiple variables, in particular a preoperative left shoulder up, preoperative PTC >40°, MTC correction, and surgical approach. Shoulder balance is not significantly different whether the PTC is included in the fusion or not. But, powerful compensation mechanisms utilized to balance shoulder in the -PTC group can impose changes of trunk alignment, main and compensatory lumbar curves.
authors: Spine Center, Werner-Wicker-Clinic, Im Kreuzfeld 4, 34513, Bad Wildungen, Germany, heiko.koller@t-online.de.
authors: Heiko
authors: H
authors: Koller
authors: Oliver
authors: O
authors: Meier
authors: Anna
authors: A
authors: McClung
authors: Wolfgang
authors: W
authors: Hitzl
authors: Michael
authors: M
authors: Mayer
authors: Daniel
authors: D
authors: Sucato
mesh_terms: D000293:Adolescent; D002648:Child; D002968:Clavicle / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008159:Lumbar Vertebrae / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging / Q000601:surgery*; D008297:Male; D015233:Models, Statistical; D011184:Postoperative Period; D011859:Radiography; D012189:Retrospective Studies; D012447:Sacrum / Q000601:surgery; D012600:Scoliosis / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging / Q000601:surgery*; D012720:Severity of Illness Index; D012782:Shoulder / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging*; D013123:Spinal Fusion / Q000379:methods*; D013904:Thoracic Vertebrae / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging / Q000601:surgery*; D013909:Thorax; D060726:Torso / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging*; D016896:Treatment Outcome; D055815:Young Adult
references: J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2013 Apr 17;95(8):e49
references: 23595075
references: Eur Spine J. 2012 Oct;21(10 ):1978-83
references: 22842954
references: Eur Spine J. 2011 Oct;20(10 ):1780-7
references: 21769446
references: J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2001 Aug;83-A(8):1169-81
references: 11507125
references: Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2001 Sep 15;26(18):1966-75
references: 11547194
references: Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2013 Sep 1;38(19):1672-80
references: 23759806
references: Eur Spine J. 2009 Apr;18(4):522-30
references: 19219467
references: Global Spine J. 2011 Dec;1(1):27-36
references: 24353935
references: J Spinal Disord Tech. 2009 Oct;22(7):530-9
references: 20075818
references: J Spinal Disord Tech. 2011 Oct;24(7):462-8
references: 21164363
references: Eur Spine J. 2008 Mar;17 (3):348-354
references: 18027001
references: Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2000 Sep 15;25(18):2342-9
references: 10984786
references: Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2013 May 20;38(12 ):E705-12
references: 23459133
references: Eur Spine J. 2009 Jan;18(1):45-51
references: 19043746
references: J Neurosurg Spine. 2009 Mar;10 (3):214-9
references: 19320580
references: Eur Spine J. 2011 Jul;20(7):1048-57
references: 21387194
references: Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2012 Nov 15;37(24):E1511-6
references: 22895482
references: Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2010 Jan 15;35(2):194-8
references: 20081516
references: Eur Spine J. 2013 Jun;22(6):1273-85
references: 23455950
references: Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2002 Sep 15;27(18):2013-20
references: 12634561
references: Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2011 Sep 15;36(20):1658-64
references: 21358573
references: Eur Spine J. 2011 Jul;20(7):1137-40
references: 21533598
references: Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1993 Sep 15;18(12 ):1599-608
references: 8235838
references: J Pediatr Orthop. 2008 Oct-Nov;28(7):733-9
references: 18812899