<- Back to digest

Journal of Pediatric Orthopaedics - 2026-07-01 - Journal Article; Multicenter Study

CHARGE Syndrome and Scoliosis: A Multicenter Study Highlighting Elevated Surgical Complications.

Taha O, Weintraub M, Givens R, Elfilali MM, Kulubya ES, Vitale MG, Roye BD, Pediatric Spine Study Group (PSSG)

case seriesLOE IVn = 11Mean 5 years for growth-friendly group; 2 years post-fusion for fusion group.

Topics

pediatricsspine
PMID: 41208733DOI: 10.1097/BPO.0000000000003157View on PubMed ->

Key Takeaway

Growth-friendly surgery for scoliosis in CHARGE syndrome carries a 25% instrument-related complication rate, with curve correction regressing from 49° to 58° by 5 years, while spinal fusion achieved more durable correction (54° to 36°) with no reported complications.

Summary Depth

Choose how much analysis to show on this article page.

Summary

This multicenter registry study evaluated scoliosis management outcomes in 11 patients with confirmed CHARGE syndrome, comparing growth-friendly surgery (n=5), primary fusion (n=3), and bracing (n=3). Growth-friendly procedures reduced major curves from 74° to 49° postoperatively, but correction regressed to 58° at 5 years, with 4 complications (hardware dislodgement, rod fractures) in 2 patients yielding a 25% instrument-related complication rate. Fusion provided more stable correction (54° to 36° at 2 years) with no complications, and EOSQ-24 scores were comparable to other syndromic EOS cohorts.

Key Limitation

The sample size of 11 patients with heterogeneous treatment allocation makes it impossible to draw comparative conclusions between surgical strategies or to identify predictors of complication.

Original Abstract

BACKGROUND

CHARGE syndrome is a rare congenital disorder characterized by a spectrum of anomalies, including coloboma, heart defects, choanal atresia, and ear abnormalities. Spinal deformities, particularly scoliosis, are frequently observed and may significantly impair quality of life by limiting pulmonary function, reducing mobility, and increasing pain. This study provides the first comprehensive evaluation of scoliosis management and outcomes in CHARGE syndrome, assessing both surgical and nonsurgical approaches.

METHODS

An international multicenter registry was queried to identify patients with a confirmed diagnosis of CHARGE syndrome and scoliosis. Demographic, clinical, and radiographic data were collected. Complications were categorized using the modified Clavien-Dindo-Sink system. Patient-reported outcomes were assessed using the EOSQ-24 and compared with a normative syndromic early-onset scoliosis cohort.

RESULTS

Eleven patients were identified: 5 underwent growth-friendly surgery (2 TGR, 1 VEPTR, and 2 MCGR), of which 3 progressed to fusion; 3 had primary fusion; and 3 were braced. Growth-friendly surgery reduced the average major curve from 74 to 49 degrees postoperatively, but this correction regressed over time, with major curves averaging 58 degrees at 5 years. In contrast, fusion provided more stable outcomes, reducing major curve from 54 degrees pre-fusion to 36 degrees at 2 years postoperatively. Four complications were reported in 2 of 8 surgical patients, yielding an instrument-related complication rate of 25%. All complications occurred after growth-friendly procedures and included hardware dislodgement and rod fractures. EOSQ-24 scores were similar to other syndromic cohorts across most domains.

CONCLUSION

Scoliosis in CHARGE syndrome is frequently severe and may require surgical intervention. While growth-friendly implants offer initial deformity correction, the benefit tends to diminish over time-potentially influenced by atypical growth patterns in CHARGE patients. Spinal fusion demonstrated greater long-term stability and a lower complication burden. The 25% complication rate observed in this cohort exceeds rates reported in other syndromic scoliosis populations, emphasizing the need for tailored perioperative planning for this population. Larger studies are needed to guide optimal treatment strategies in this complex patient population.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV-retrospective case series.