Impact of Single- Versus Dual-Surgeon Approach in Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis Posterior Spinal Fusion: A Systematic Review
Presenter Status
Medical Student
Abstract Type
Clinical Research
Primary Mentor or Principal Investigator
Aaron Shaw, DO
Presentation Type
Poster
Start Date
21-5-2026 12:00 PM
End Date
21-5-2026 1:00 PM
Abstract Text
Background:
Adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) is a complex three-dimensional spinal deformity that may require surgical correction to prevent progression and restore alignment and function. Previous studies suggest that a dual-surgeon approach to posterior spinal fusion (PSF) may enhance efficiency, reduce blood loss, and improve outcomes compared to a single-surgeon strategy. Additionally, evidence indicates a learning curve in deformity surgery, with less experienced surgeons demonstrating longer operative times, greater blood loss, and longer hospital stays. This review compares perioperative and postoperative outcomes between single- and dual-surgeon approaches.
Objectives/Goal:
To systematically review the literature comparing perioperative and postoperative outcomes of single-surgeon versus dual-surgeon posterior spinal fusion for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis.
Methods/Design:
Following PRISMA guidelines, PubMed, Embase, and Google Scholar were searched (July 2025) for studies comparing single- and dual-surgeon PSF in AIS. Seven studies (595 patients) met inclusion criteria. Data extracted included operative time, blood loss, transfusion, hospital/ICU stay, Cobb angle correction, and complications. Mean differences were summarized.
Results:
Dual-surgeon approaches reduced operative time by ~75-100 minutes (SS: 300-460 min; DS: 210-330 min) and estimated blood loss by 250-400 mL (SS: ~950 mL; DS: ~650 mL), with transfusions 2-4× lower. Hospital stays decreased by 1-1.5 days (SS: 5.0; DS: 3.8), and ICU stay was shorter in select studies. Cobb angle correction improved 10-15° and percent curve correction increased 10-15% with dual surgeons. Complication rates were similar, though dual-surgeon outcomes were more consistent among less experienced surgeons.
Conclusions:
Dual-surgeon PSF in AIS is associated with shorter operative times, reduced blood loss and transfusions, shorter hospital stays, and improved curve correction without increasing complication rates. The benefits appear more significant for surgeons early in their careers. Prospective studies are needed to evaluate long-term outcomes and cost-effectiveness.
Impact of Single- Versus Dual-Surgeon Approach in Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis Posterior Spinal Fusion: A Systematic Review
Background:
Adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) is a complex three-dimensional spinal deformity that may require surgical correction to prevent progression and restore alignment and function. Previous studies suggest that a dual-surgeon approach to posterior spinal fusion (PSF) may enhance efficiency, reduce blood loss, and improve outcomes compared to a single-surgeon strategy. Additionally, evidence indicates a learning curve in deformity surgery, with less experienced surgeons demonstrating longer operative times, greater blood loss, and longer hospital stays. This review compares perioperative and postoperative outcomes between single- and dual-surgeon approaches.
Objectives/Goal:
To systematically review the literature comparing perioperative and postoperative outcomes of single-surgeon versus dual-surgeon posterior spinal fusion for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis.
Methods/Design:
Following PRISMA guidelines, PubMed, Embase, and Google Scholar were searched (July 2025) for studies comparing single- and dual-surgeon PSF in AIS. Seven studies (595 patients) met inclusion criteria. Data extracted included operative time, blood loss, transfusion, hospital/ICU stay, Cobb angle correction, and complications. Mean differences were summarized.
Results:
Dual-surgeon approaches reduced operative time by ~75-100 minutes (SS: 300-460 min; DS: 210-330 min) and estimated blood loss by 250-400 mL (SS: ~950 mL; DS: ~650 mL), with transfusions 2-4× lower. Hospital stays decreased by 1-1.5 days (SS: 5.0; DS: 3.8), and ICU stay was shorter in select studies. Cobb angle correction improved 10-15° and percent curve correction increased 10-15% with dual surgeons. Complication rates were similar, though dual-surgeon outcomes were more consistent among less experienced surgeons.
Conclusions:
Dual-surgeon PSF in AIS is associated with shorter operative times, reduced blood loss and transfusions, shorter hospital stays, and improved curve correction without increasing complication rates. The benefits appear more significant for surgeons early in their careers. Prospective studies are needed to evaluate long-term outcomes and cost-effectiveness.
Comments
Restricted to Title/Author List/Abstract only as requested by primary author
Poster Board Number: 18