RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Adult Congenital Spine Deformity: Clinical Features and Motivations for Surgical Treatment
JF International Journal of Spine Surgery
JO Int J Spine Surg
FD International Society for the Advancement of Spine Surgery
SP 1238
OP 1245
DO 10.14444/8157
VO 15
IS 6
A1 Pizones, Javier
A1 Moreno-Manzanaro, Lucía
A1 Vila-Casademunt, Alba
A1 Fernández-Baíllo, Nicomedes
A1 Sánchez-Márquez, José
A1 Talavera, Gloria
A1 Obeid, Ibrahim
A1 Alanay, Ahmet
A1 Kleinstück, Frank
A1 Pellisé, Ferran
A1 Perez-Grueso, Francisco Javier Sánchez
A1 
YR 2021
UL https://www.ijssurgery.com/content/15/6/1238.abstract
AB Background There is scarce information available about adult congenital spine deformity (ACSD) in the literature, especially its impact after the pediatric age. The aim was to define ACSD characteristics and to establish the drivers for surgical intervention.Methods Cross-sectional study of data collected in an adult deformity multicenter database. Only ACSD patients were included. Demographic and radiographic data, as well as patient-reported outcome measures, were assessed. Conservatively (C) vs surgically (S) treated patients were compared using Student t test, χ², and Mann-Whitney U test.Results Fifty-two patients were included. They were young adults (x = 37.7 years), mostly female (71%). Among them, 60% had single hemivertebrae (HV), 35% had multiple HV, and 5% had segmentation defects. Also, 75% had mainly coronal deformity (Cobb 62.5° ± 29.6) and 25% had sagittal deformity.Mean Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) was 29.6% ± 17 and mean Scoliosis Research Society 22-item survey (SRS-22) total score was 3.2 ± 0.8. Of note, mean SRS-22 self-image score was 2.8 ± 0.9 and 36-item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) physical function score was 40.9 ± 11.Thirty patients were treated conservatively (C), whereas 22 patients underwent surgery (S). No differences were found regarding age, type or location of the deformity, comorbidities, or radiographic parameters. Operated patients had worse Core Outcome Measurement Index (COMI) back scores (C: 3.8 ± 2.4 vs S: 6.7 ± 2.4; P = 0.004); worse SRS-22 self-image (C: 3 ± 0.9 vs S: 2.5 ± 0.9; P = 0.047), and SRS-22 total scores (C: 3.4 ± 0.8 vs S: 2.9 ± 0.7; P = 0.01); worse SF-36 physical component summary (C: 43.3 ± 10.8 vs S: 36.7 ± 10.4; P = 0.048); and worse SF-36 physical role, function, and social function.Conclusion Adult congenital deformity patients were mainly female young adults, with formation defects (HV), worried about their image and presenting some degree of functional impairment and pain. These symptoms were the essential drivers for surgery, rather than the radiographic deformity itself.Clinical Relevance One of the few studies describing the characteristics and clinical concerns of patients with congenital spinal deformities.Level of Evidence 3.