Video-assisted anterior thoracoscopic spinal fusion versus posterior spinal fusion: A comparative study utilizing the SRS-22 outcome instrument

Spine

Volumn 34, Issue 2, 2009, Pages 193-198

  Lonner, Baron S ^a,b   Auerbach, Joshua D ^a   Estreicher, Michael ^a   Milby, Andrew H ^a   Kean, Kristin E ^a   Panagopoulos, Georgia ^a   Chang, David ^a  

^a NYU HOSPITAL FOR JOINT DISEASES   (United States)

^b NONE   (United States)

Author keywords

Adolescent idiopathic scoliosis; Outcome assessment; Pain; PSF; Quality of life; SRS 22; VATS

Indexed keywords

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; ARTICLE; CHILD; CONTROLLED STUDY; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; HUMAN; IDIOPATHIC SCOLIOSIS; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MENTAL HEALTH; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PAIN ASSESSMENT; PATIENT SATISFACTION; PHYSICAL ACTIVITY; POSTERIOR SPINE FUSION; POSTOPERATIVE PERIOD; PREOPERATIVE PERIOD; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUESTIONNAIRE; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; SCHOOL CHILD; SCOLIOSIS RESEARCH SOCIETY 22 SCORING SYSTEM; SCORING SYSTEM; SELF CONCEPT; SPINE FUSION; SURGICAL APPROACH; SURGICAL TECHNIQUE; THORACOSCOPY; VIDEO ASSISTED THORACOSCOPIC FUSION; COHORT ANALYSIS; COMPARATIVE STUDY; INSTRUMENTATION; METHODOLOGY; PATHOLOGY; PSYCHOLOGICAL ASPECT; RADIOGRAPHY; SCAR; SCOLIOSIS; SELF EVALUATION; STATISTICS; TREATMENT OUTCOME; VERTEBRA; VIDEORECORDING;

ADOLESCENT; CICATRIX; COHORT STUDIES; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MENTAL HEALTH; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT (HEALTH CARE); PATIENT SATISFACTION; QUESTIONNAIRES; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; SCOLIOSIS; SELF ASSESSMENT (PSYCHOLOGY); SPINAL FUSION; THORACIC VERTEBRAE; THORACOSCOPY; TREATMENT OUTCOME; VIDEO RECORDING;

EID: 64049088314     PISSN: 03622436     EISSN: 15281159     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e318191e9e8     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. Gartland JJ. Orthopaedic clinical research. Deficiencies in experimental design and determinations of outcome. J B Joint Surg Am 1988;70:1357-64.
2. Sledge CB. Crisis, challenge, and credibility. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1985;67:658-62.
3. Haher TR, Gorup JM, Shin TM, et al. Results of the Scoliosis Research Society instrument for evaluation of surgical outcome in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. A multicenter study of 244 patients. Spine 1999;24:1435-40.
4. Asher M, Min LS, Burton D, et al. Discrimination validity of the scoliosis research society-22 patient questionnaire: relationship to idiopathic scoliosis curve pattern and curve size. Spine 2003;28:74-8.
5. Asher M, Min LS, Burton D, et al. The reliability and concurrent validity of the scoliosis research society-22 patient questionnaire for idiopathic scoliosis. Spine 2003;28:63-9.
6. Asher MA, Min LS, Burton DC. Further development and validation of the Scoliosis Research Society (SRS) outcomes instrument. Spine 2000;25:2381-6.
7. Asher MA, Lai SM, Glattes RC, et al. Refinement of the SRS-22 health-related quality of life questionnaire function domain. Spine 2006;31:593-7.
8. White SF, Asher MA, Lai SM, et al. Patients' perceptions of overall function, pain, and appearance after primary posterior instrumentation and fusion for idiopathic scoliosis. Spine 1999;24:1693-9.
9. Asher M, Min LS, Burton D, et al. Scoliosis research society-22 patient questionnaire: responsiveness to change associated with surgical treatment. Spine 2003;28:70-3.
10. D'Andrea LP, Betz RR, Lenke LG, et al. Do radiographic parameters correlate with clinical outcomes in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis? Spine 2000;25:1795-802.
11. Merola AA, Haher TR, Brkaric M, et al. A multicenter study of the outcomes of the surgical treatment of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis using the Scoliosis Research Society (SRS) outcome instrument. Spine 2002;27:2046-51.
12. Wilson PL, Newton PO, Wenger DR, et al. A multicenter study analyzing the relationship of a standardized radiographic scoring system of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis and the Scoliosis Research Society outcomes instrument. Spine 2002;27:2036-40.
13. Lenke LG, Betz RR, Harms J, et al. Adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: a new classification to determine extent of spinal arthrodesis. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2001;83-A:1169-81.
14. Lonner BS, Kondrachov D, Siddiqi F, et al. Thoracoscopic spinal fusion compared with posterior spinal fusion for the treatment of thoracic adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2006;88:1022-34.
15. Asher M, Lai SM, Burton D, et al. The influence of spine and trunk deformity on preoperative idiopathic scoliosis patients' health-related quality of life questionnaire responses. Spine 2004;29:861-8.
16. Kim YJ, Lenke LG, Cho SK, et al. Comparative analysis of pedicle screw versus hook instrumentation in posterior spinal fusion of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Spine 2004;29:2040-8.
17. Kim YJ, Lenke LG, Kim J, et al. Comparative analysis of pedicle screw versus hybrid instrumentation in posterior spinal fusion of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Spine 2006;31:291-8.
18. Wilk B, Karol LA, Johnston CE, et al. The effect of scoliosis fusion on spinal motion: a comparison of fused and nonfused patients with idiopathic scoliosis. Spine 2006;31:309-14.
19. Wong HK, Hee HT, Yu Z, et al. Results of thoracoscopic instrumented fusion versus conventional posterior instrumented fusion in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis undergoing selective thoracic fusion. Spine 2004;29:2031-8.
20. Potter BK, Kuklo TR, Lenke LG. Radiographic outcomes of anterior spinal fusion versus posterior spinal fusion with thoracic pedicle screws for treatment of Lenke Type I adolescent idiopathic scoliosis curves. Spine 2005;30:1859-66.
21. Berven S. Judging success: usefulness of outcomes assessments. Paper presented at: 23rd Federation of Spine Associations (Annual Specialty Day Meeting) at the Annual Meeting of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons; August 3, 2008; San Francisco, CA. Abstract.