Operative Versus Nonoperative Treatment for Adult Symptomatic Lumbar Scoliosis.

dc.contributor.author

Kelly, Michael P

dc.contributor.author

Lurie, Jon D

dc.contributor.author

Yanik, Elizabeth L

dc.contributor.author

Shaffrey, Christopher I

dc.contributor.author

Baldus, Christine R

dc.contributor.author

Boachie-Adjei, Oheneba

dc.contributor.author

Buchowski, Jacob M

dc.contributor.author

Carreon, Leah Y

dc.contributor.author

Crawford, Charles H

dc.contributor.author

Edwards, Charles

dc.contributor.author

Errico, Thomas J

dc.contributor.author

Glassman, Steven D

dc.contributor.author

Gupta, Munish C

dc.contributor.author

Lenke, Lawrence G

dc.contributor.author

Lewis, Stephen J

dc.contributor.author

Kim, Han Jo

dc.contributor.author

Koski, Tyler

dc.contributor.author

Parent, Stefan

dc.contributor.author

Schwab, Frank J

dc.contributor.author

Smith, Justin S

dc.contributor.author

Zebala, Lukas P

dc.contributor.author

Bridwell, Keith H

dc.date.accessioned

2023-06-20T15:23:13Z

dc.date.available

2023-06-20T15:23:13Z

dc.date.issued

2019-02

dc.date.updated

2023-06-20T15:23:12Z

dc.description.abstract

Background

The effectiveness of operative compared with nonoperative treatment at initial presentation (no prior fusion) for adult lumbar scoliosis has not, to our knowledge, been evaluated in controlled trials. The goals of this study were to evaluate the effects of operative and nonoperative treatment and to assess the benefits of these treatments to help treating physicians determine whether patients are better managed operatively or nonoperatively.

Methods

Patients with adult symptomatic lumbar scoliosis (aged 40 to 80 years, with a coronal Cobb angle measurement of ≥30° and an Oswestry Disability Index [ODI] score of ≥20 or Scoliosis Research Society [SRS]-22 score of ≤4.0) from 9 North American centers were enrolled in concurrent randomized or observational cohorts to evaluate operative versus nonoperative treatment. The primary outcomes were differences in the mean change from baseline in the SRS-22 subscore and ODI at 2-year follow-up. For the randomized cohort, the initial sample-size calculation estimated that 41 patients per group (82 total) would provide 80% power with alpha equal to 0.05, anticipating 10% loss to follow-up and 20% nonadherence in the nonoperative arm. However, an interim sample-size calculation estimated that 18 patients per group would be sufficient.

Results

Sixty-three patients were enrolled in the randomized cohort: 30 in the operative group and 33 in the nonoperative group. Two hundred and twenty-three patients were enrolled in the observational cohort: 112 in the operative group and 111 in the nonoperative group. The intention-to-treat analysis of the randomized cohort found that, at 2 years of follow-up, outcomes did not differ between the groups. Nonadherence was high in the randomized cohort (64% nonoperative-to-operative crossover). In the as-treated analysis of the randomized cohort, operative treatment was associated with greater improvement at the 2-year follow-up in the SRS-22 subscore (adjusted mean difference, 0.7 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.5 to 1.0]) and in the ODI (adjusted mean difference, -16 [95% CI, -22 to -10]) (p < 0.001 for both). Surgery was also superior to nonoperative care in the observational cohort at 2 years after treatment on the basis of SRS-22 subscore and ODI outcomes (p < 0.001). In an overall responder analysis, more operative patients achieved improvement meeting or exceeding the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) in the SRS-22 subscore (85.7% versus 38.7%; p < 0.001) and the ODI (77.4% versus 38.3%; p < 0.001). Thirty-four revision surgeries were performed in 24 (14%) of the operative patients.

Conclusions

On the basis of as-treated and MCID analyses, if a patient with adult symptomatic lumbar scoliosis is satisfied with current spine-related health, nonoperative treatment is advised, with the understanding that improvement is unlikely. If a patient is not satisfied with current spine health and expects improvement, surgery is preferred.

Level of evidence

Therapeutic Level II. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
dc.identifier

00004623-201902200-00007

dc.identifier.issn

0021-9355

dc.identifier.issn

1535-1386

dc.identifier.uri

https://hdl.handle.net/10161/28219

dc.language

eng

dc.publisher

Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)

dc.relation.ispartof

The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume

dc.relation.isversionof

10.2106/jbjs.18.00483

dc.subject

Lumbar Vertebrae

dc.subject

Humans

dc.subject

Scoliosis

dc.subject

Treatment Outcome

dc.subject

Orthopedic Procedures

dc.subject

Adult

dc.subject

Aged

dc.subject

Aged, 80 and over

dc.subject

Middle Aged

dc.subject

Female

dc.subject

Male

dc.subject

Medication Adherence

dc.subject

Watchful Waiting

dc.title

Operative Versus Nonoperative Treatment for Adult Symptomatic Lumbar Scoliosis.

dc.type

Journal article

duke.contributor.orcid

Shaffrey, Christopher I|0000-0001-9760-8386

pubs.begin-page

338

pubs.end-page

352

pubs.issue

4

pubs.organisational-group

Duke

pubs.organisational-group

School of Medicine

pubs.organisational-group

Clinical Science Departments

pubs.organisational-group

Orthopaedic Surgery

pubs.organisational-group

Neurosurgery

pubs.publication-status

Published

pubs.volume

101

Files

Original bundle

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
Operative Versus Nonoperative Treatment for Adult Symptomatic Lumbar Scoliosis (1).pdf
Size:
1.66 MB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format