Related Experiment Video
Updated: Sep 6, 2025
Evaluation of Patients' Posture and Gait Profile After Lumbar Fusion Surgery by Video Rasterstereography and Treadmill Gait Analysis
Published on: March 23, 2019
Trunk Range of Motion and Patient Outcomes After Anterior Vertebral Body Tethering Versus Posterior Spinal Fusion:
Joshua M Pahys1, Amer F Samdani1, Steven W Hwang1
1Shriners Children's Philadelphia, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
Background:
Anterior vertebral body tethering (AVBT) for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) is postulated to preserve motion compared with traditional posterior spinal fusion (PSF), but few studies exist to date. We used a validated computerized 3D model to compare trunk motion between patients treated with PSF and AVBT, and analyzed trunk motion in relation to the lowest instrumented vertebra (LIV).
Methods:
This was a single-center retrospective review of a consecutive series of skeletally immature patients with AIS who underwent motion analysis prior to PSF (n = 47) or AVBT (n = 65) and 2 years postoperatively. Patients were divided into 4 groups on the basis of the LIV (≤L1, L2, L3, L4). Computerized 3D kinematic evaluations included thoracic and lumbar flexion, extension, side-bending, and rotation. Patient outcomes were assessed using the Scoliosis Research Society (SRS)-22 questionnaire.
Results:
The LIV was ≤L1 in 48 patients treated with AVBT and 23 treated with PSF, L2 in 4 AVBT and 8 PSF patients, L3 in 10 AVBT and 8 PSF patients, and L4 in 3 AVBT and 8 PSF patients. PSF patients had a significant loss of motion in all 4 directions at 2 years postoperatively (e.g., flexion loss was 11° for ≤L1 to 30° for L4; p < 0.001). This equated to a 7° loss of trunk flexion per additional LIV level included in the fusion. AVBT patients only demonstrated loss of flexion and side-bending at 2 years postoperatively (e.g., flexion loss of 11° for L1 to 17° for L4; p < 0.001). Preoperative curve size and flexibility did not have any significant impact on differences in trunk motion between AVBT and PSF. SRS-22 scores were predominantly similar for AVBT versus PSF preoperatively and at 2 years postoperatively.
Conclusions:
Patients treated with AVBT experienced predominantly less motion loss compared with PSF patients at 2 years postoperatively. Patients treated with PSF demonstrated loss of motion in all planes that increased with each additional LIV from ≤L1 to L4, with 7° loss of flexion per additional LIV. However, the differences in total trunk motions were relatively modest for PSF and AVBT with an LIV of ≤L1. Preoperative curve magnitude and flexibility had no significant impact on trunk motion in either group. SRS-22 scores were similar for both groups at 2 years postoperatively.
Level Of Evidence:
Therapeutic Level III . See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
