Study design: A case series of idiopathic scoliosis patients treated with thoracoscopic anterior instrumentation was compared to a similar group of patients treated by open anterior instrumentation.
Objectives: To evaluate the morbidity associated with thoracoscopic instrumentation compared to the open approach for thoracic scoliosis.
Methods: A consecutive group of thoracoscopically treated patients with Lenke 1 adolescent idiopathic scoliosis was compared to similar patients gathered from the DePuy-AcroMed Harms Study Group database. Perioperative outcome measures as well as early postoperative functional outcomes (pulmonary function, shoulder strength) were compared.
Results: There were 38 thoracoscopic instrumentation cases with greater than 6 months' follow-up that were compared to 68 anterior open instrumentation cases. The radiographic outcomes were similar (60% +/- 11% vs. 59% +/- 17% thoracic curve correction for the thoracoscopic and open groups, respectively). The reduction in forced vital capacity was significantly (P = 0.01) greater in the open group (0.6 +/- 0.3 L) compared to the endoscopic group (0.4 +/- 0.3 L). There was a trend towards greater return of shoulder girdle strength and range of motion 6 weeks after surgery in the thoracoscopic patients.
Conclusion: The thoracoscopic approach for instrumentation of scoliosis has advantages of reduced chest wall morbidity compared with the open thoracotomy method but allows comparable curve correction.