Does the outcome of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis surgery justify the rising cost of the procedures?

Journal of Pediatric Orthopaedics

Volumn 31, Issue 1 SUPPL., 2011, Pages

  Roach, James W ^a   Mehlman, Charles T ^b   Sanders, James O ^c  

^a CHILDREN S HOSPITAL OF PITTSBURGH   (United States)

^b CINCINNATI CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF ROCHESTER MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

outcome of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis; pedicle screw costs; spinal implant costs

Indexed keywords

ADOLESCENT; ARTICLE; BONE REMODELING; CAST APPLICATION; CONTROLLED STUDY; HEALTH CARE COST; HUMAN; HYBRID; IDIOPATHIC SCOLIOSIS; IMPLANT; NORTH AMERICA; PATIENT CARE; PEDICLE SCREW; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PSEUDARTHROSIS; SPINE MALFORMATION; SPINE SURGERY;

ADOLESCENT; CASTS, SURGICAL; HEALTH CARE COSTS; HUMANS; ORTHOPEDIC PROCEDURES; PROSTHESES AND IMPLANTS; SCOLIOSIS; SPINAL FUSION; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 78650952820     PISSN: 02716798     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/BPO.0b013e3181f73bfd     Document Type: Article

References (12)

1. 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;31:291-298.
2. Dobbs MB, Lenke LG, Kim J, et al. Selective posterior thoracic fusions for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: comparison of hooks versus pedicle screws. Spine. 2006;31:2400-2404.
3. Liljenqvist U, Lepsien U, Hackenberg L, et al. Comparative analysis of pedicle screw and hook instrumentation in posterior correction and fusion of idiopathic thoracic scoliosis. Eur Spine J. 2002; 11:336-343.
4. Kim YJ, Lenke LG, Bridwell KH, et al. Prospective pulmonary function comparison following posterior segmental spinal instrumentation and fusion of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: is there a relationship between major thoracic curve correction and pulmonary function test improvement? Spine. 2007;32:2685-2693.
5. Vora V, Crawford A, Babekhir N, et al. A pedicle screw construct gives an enhanced posterior correction of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis when compared with other constructs: myth or reality. Spine. 2007;32:1869-1874.
6. Kuklo TR, Potter BK, Lenke LG, et al. Surgical revision rates of hooks versus hybrid versus screws versus combined anteroposterior spinal fusion for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Spine. 2007;32: 2258-2264.
7. Rose PS, Lenke LG, Bridwell KH, et al. Pedicle screw instrumentation for adult idiopathic scoliosis: an improvement over hook/hybrid fixation. Spine. 2009;34:852-857.
8. Cheng I, Kim Y, Gupta MC, et al. Apical sublaminar wires versus pedicle screws-which provides better results for surgical correction of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis? Spine. 2005;30:2104-2112.
9. Karatoprak O, Unay K, Tezer M, et al. Comparative analysis of pedicle screw versus hybrid instrumentation in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis surgery. Int Orthop. 2008;32:523-528.
10. Storer SK, Vitale MG, Hyman JE, et al. Correction of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis using thoracic pedicle screw fixation versus hook constructs. J Pediatr Orthop. 2005;25:415-419.
11. Kim YJ, Lenke LG, Bridwell KH, et al. 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. 2007;32: 2731-2738.
12. Sanders JO, Haynes R, Lighter D, et al. Variation in care among spinal deformity surgeons: results of a survey of the Shriners hospitals for children. Spine. 2007;32:1444-1449.