Does spasticity affect outcomes in patients with cerebral palsy undergoing posterior spinal fusion?
case_control · Level III
Where this comes from
- Record sourced from PubMed, PMID 42601540.
- Also identified by DOI 10.1007/s43390-026-01497-6.
- No licence information is recorded for this record.
- Because redistribution is not established, this page shows the abstract only. Follow the links below for the full text.
Abstract
We evaluated whether the type of cerebral palsy (CP) (spastic vs. ataxic-hypotonic) affected outcomes in patients who underwent posterior spinal fusion (PSF). We queried CP patients from 2008-2020 with GFMCS grade IV or V who underwent PSF with at least 2 years' follow-up. Demographic, radiographic, operative and CPCHILD scores were compared. We performed a matched comparison of patients with spasticity (SP) versus patients with ataxia-hypotonia (AH) by age and coronal curve angle. From 390 CP patients, 309 (79%) were spastic, 20 (5%) ataxic-hypotonic, 11 (3%) dystonic, and 50 (13%) mixed. When comparing matched SP to AH patients, preoperative demographic and radiographic variables were comparable except that SP patients had greater pelvic obliquity (27° vs. 20°, p<0.05), while postoperative pelvic obliquity (9° vs. 6°, p<0.01) was less at 1 and 2 years in the AH group. While surgical time was not different between groups (p>0.05), estimated blood loss (1465±1114 mL vs. 905±798 mL, p<0.01), postoperative pain (8% vs. 0%, p<0.01), and implant prominence (5% vs. 0%, p<0.01) were higher in the SP group. The overall reoperation rates were not different between groups (p>0.05), although the incidence of broken implants (20% vs. 2%, p<0.05) was higher in the AH group and reoperations due to implant failure were higher in the SP group (4% vs. 0%, p<0.05). Patients with spastic CP experienced higher blood loss, more postoperative pain, and greater implant prominence while patients with ataxic-hypotonic CP had less pelvic obliquity but experienced more broken implants.