A finite element analysis of different pedicle screw placement strategies for treatment of Lenke 1 adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: which is better?

References

• Aubin CE, Goussev V, Petit Y. 2004 Mar. Biomechanical modelling of segmental instrumentation for surgical correction of 3D spinal deformities using Euler-Bernoulli thin-beam elastic deformation equations. Med Biol Eng Comput. 42(2):216–221.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Aubin CE, Labelle H, Chevrefils C, Desroches G, Clin J, Eng AB. 2008 Sep. Preoperative planning simulator for spinal deformity surgeries. Spine. 33(20):2143–2152.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bharucha NJ, Lonner BS, Auerbach JD, Kean KE, Trobisch PD. 2013 Apr. Low-density versus high-density thoracic pedicle screw constructs in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: do more screws lead to a better outcome?. Spine J. 13(4):375–381.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen J, Yang C, Ran B, Wang Y, Wang C, Zhu X, Bai Y, Li M. 2013 Jul. Correction of Lenke 5 adolescent idiopathic scoliosis using pedicle screw instrumentation: does implant density influence the correction? Spine. 38(15):E946–E951.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clements DH, Betz RR, Newton PO, Rohmiller M, Marks MC, Bastrom T. 2009 Sep. Correlation of scoliosis curve correction with the number and type of fixation anchors. Spine. 34:2147–2150.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ersen O, Bilgic S, Ozyurek S, Ekinci S, Koca K, Oguz E. 2014 Dec. Comparison of two treatment strategy for Lenke I adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Acta Orthop Belg. 80:487–492.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fürderer S, Scholten N, Coenen O, Koebke J, Eysel P. 2011 Feb. In-vitro comparison of the pullout strength of 3 different thoracic screw fixation techniques. J Spinal Disord Tech. 24(1):E6–E10.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Ghandehari H, Mahabadi MA, Mahdavi SM, Shahsavaripour A, Seyed Tari HV, Safdari F. 2015 Apr. Evaluation of patient outcome and satisfaction after surgical treatment of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis using scoliosis research society-30. Arch Bone Joint Surg. 3:109–113.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Ketenci IE, Yanik HS, Demiroz S, Ulusoy A, Erdem S. 2016. Three-dimensional correction in patients with Lenke 1 adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: comparison of consecutive versus interval pedicle screw instrumentation. Spine. 41(2):134–138.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kim HJ, Blanco JS, Widmann RF. 2009 Feb. Update on the management of idiopathic scoliosis. Curr Opin Pediatr. 21(1):55–64.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lafage V, Dubousset J, Lavaste F, Skalli W. 2004. 3D finite element simulation of Cotrel-Dubousset correction. Comput Aided Surg. 9(1–2):17–25.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Larson AN, Polly DW Jr, Diamond B, Ledonio C, Richards BS 3rd, Emans JB, Sucato DJ, Johnston CE. 2014 Apr. Does higher anchor density result in increased curve correction and improved clinical outcomes in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis? Spine. 39:571–578.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li M, Shen Y, Fang X, Ni J, Gu S, Zhu X, Zhang Z. 2009 Jun. Coronal and sagittal plane correction in patients with Lenke 1 adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: a comparison of consecutive versus interval pedicle screw placement. J Spinal Disord Tech. 22(4):251–256.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Majdouline Y, Aubin CE, Robitaille M, Sarwark JF, Labelle H. 2007 Oct–Nov. Scoliosis correction objectives in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. J Pediatr Orthop. 27:775–781.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mayo AE, Labrom RD, Askin GN, Adam CJ. 2010 Jun. A biomechanical study of top screw pullout in anterior scoliosis correction constructs. Spine. 35(13):E587–E595.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Quan GM, Gibson MJ. 2010 Mar. Correction of main thoracic adolescent idiopathic scoliosis using pedicle screw instrumentation: does higher implant density improve correction? Spine. 35(5):562–567.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Robitaille M, Aubin CE, Labelle H. 2007 Oct. Intra and interobserver variability of preoperative planning for surgical instrumentation in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Eur Spine J. 16(10):1604–1614.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Salmingo RA, Tadano S, Fujisaki K, Abe Y, Ito M. 2013 Feb. Relationship of forces acting on implant rods and degree of scoliosis correction. Clin Biomech. 28(2):122–128.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Suk SI, Lee CK, Kim WJ, Chung YJ, Park YB. 1995 Jun. Segmental pedicle screw fixation in the treatment of thoracic idiopathic scoliosis. Spine. 20:1399–1405.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang X, Aubin CE, Crandall D, Labelle H. 2011 Jan. Biomechanical comparison of force levels in spinal instrumentation using monoaxial versus multi degree of freedom postloading pedicle screws. Spine. 36(2):E95–E104.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang X, Aubin CE, Crandall D, Parent S, Labelle H. 2012 Jun. Biomechanical analysis of 4 types of pedicle screws for scoliotic spine instrumentation. Spine. 37(14):E823–835.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang X, Aubin CE, Robitaille I, Labelle H. 2012 Jun. Biomechanical comparison of alternative densities of pedicle screws for the treatment of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Eur Spine J. 21(6):1082–1090.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yang S, Jones-Quaidoo SM, Eager M, Griffin JW, Reddi V, Novicoff W, Shilt J, Bersusky E, Defino H, Ouellet J, et al. 2011 Jul. Right adolescent idiopathic thoracic curve (Lenke 1 A and B): does cost of instrumentation and implant density improve radiographic and cosmetic parameters? Eur Spine J. 20(7):1039–1047.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yilmaz G, Borkhuu B, Dhawale AA, Oto M, Littleton AG, Mason DE, Gabos PG, Shah SA. 2012 Jul-Aug. Comparative analysis of hook, hybrid, and pedicle screw instrumentation in the posterior treatment of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. J Pediatr Orthop. 32:490–499.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar