Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30801373›Full record

Trial reportThe Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume2019

Operative Versus Nonoperative Treatment for Adult Symptomatic Lumbar Scoliosis.

Michael P Kelly, Jon D Lurie, Elizabeth L Yanik, Christopher I Shaffrey, Christine R Baldus, Oheneba Boachie-Adjei, Jacob M Buchowski, Leah Y Carreon, Charles H Crawford, Charles Edwards and 12 more

Erratum issuedAbstract readComparative StudyMulticenter StudyObservational Study
In one paragraph

Trial report in The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 52 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
52citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

52 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. The impact of lumbar alignment targets on mechanical complications after adult lumbar scoliosis surgery.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2022
    Trial
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Biplanar vs. uniplanar pedicle subtraction osteotomy for rigid adult spinal deformity: trading safety for correction?European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2026
    Article
  6. Comparison of quality of life between operated and non-operated adults with painful degenerative scoliosis: a 2-year prospective multicentered observational study.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2026
    Observational
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Calculation of the minimal clinically important difference in operated patients with adult spine deformity: advantages of the ROC method and significance of prevalence in threshold selection.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2024
    Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

22 authors.

Michael P KellyDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri.
Jon D LurieDepartment of Medicine, Dartmouth Medical School, Hanover, New Hampshire.
Elizabeth L YanikDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri.
Christopher I ShaffreyDepartment of Neurological Surgery, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, Virginia.
Christine R BaldusDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri.
Oheneba Boachie-AdjeiFOCOS Orthopedic Hospital, Accra, Ghana.
Jacob M BuchowskiDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri.
Leah Y CarreonNorton Leatherman Spine Center, Louisville, Kentucky.
Charles H CrawfordNorton Leatherman Spine Center, Louisville, Kentucky.
Charles EdwardsMercy Medical Center, Baltimore, Maryland.
Thomas J ErricoNYU Hospital for Joint Diseases, New York, NY.
Steven D GlassmanNorton Leatherman Spine Center, Louisville, Kentucky.
Munish C GuptaDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri.
Lawrence G LenkeDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Columbia University, New York, NY.
Stephen J LewisUHN-Orthopedics, Toronto Western Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Han Jo KimHospital for Special Surgery, New York, NY.
Tyler KoskiDepartment of Neurological Surgery, Northwestern University, Evanston, Illinois.
Stefan ParentSainte-Justine University Hospital, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
Frank J SchwabHospital for Special Surgery, New York, NY.
Justin S SmithDepartment of Neurological Surgery, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, Virginia.
Lukas P ZebalaDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri.
Keith H BridwellDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri.

Funding

A Mulit-Centered Prospective Study of Quality of Life in Adult ScoliosisR01AR055176 · NIAMS · WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY · PI BRIDWELL, KEITH HAPP · 2009 to 2014
$2.4M
NIAMS NIH HHS R01 AR055176
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe effectiveness of operative compared with nonoperative treatment at initial presentation (no prior fusion) for adult lumbar scoliosis has not, to our knowledge, been evaluated in controlled trials. The goals of this study were to evaluate the effects of operative and nonoperative treatment and to assess the benefits of these treatments to help treating physicians determine whether patients are better managed operatively or nonoperatively.

methodsPatients with adult symptomatic lumbar scoliosis (aged 40 to 80 years, with a coronal Cobb angle measurement of ≥30° and an Oswestry Disability Index [ODI] score of ≥20 or Scoliosis Research Society [SRS]-22 score of ≤4.0) from 9 North American centers were enrolled in concurrent randomized or observational cohorts to evaluate operative versus nonoperative treatment. The primary outcomes were differences in the mean change from baseline in the SRS-22 subscore and ODI at 2-year follow-up. For the randomized cohort, the initial sample-size calculation estimated that 41 patients per group (82 total) would provide 80% power with alpha equal to 0.05, anticipating 10% loss to follow-up and 20% nonadherence in the nonoperative arm. However, an interim sample-size calculation estimated that 18 patients per group would be sufficient.

resultsSixty-three patients were enrolled in the randomized cohort: 30 in the operative group and 33 in the nonoperative group. Two hundred and twenty-three patients were enrolled in the observational cohort: 112 in the operative group and 111 in the nonoperative group. The intention-to-treat analysis of the randomized cohort found that, at 2 years of follow-up, outcomes did not differ between the groups. Nonadherence was high in the randomized cohort (64% nonoperative-to-operative crossover). In the as-treated analysis of the randomized cohort, operative treatment was associated with greater improvement at the 2-year follow-up in the SRS-22 subscore (adjusted mean difference, 0.7 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.5 to 1.0]) and in the ODI (adjusted mean difference, -16 [95% CI, -22 to -10]) (p < 0.001 for both). Surgery was also superior to nonoperative care in the observational cohort at 2 years after treatment on the basis of SRS-22 subscore and ODI outcomes (p < 0.001). In an overall responder analysis, more operative patients achieved improvement meeting or exceeding the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) in the SRS-22 subscore (85.7% versus 38.7%; p < 0.001) and the ODI (77.4% versus 38.3%; p < 0.001). Thirty-four revision surgeries were performed in 24 (14%) of the operative patients.

conclusionsOn the basis of as-treated and MCID analyses, if a patient with adult symptomatic lumbar scoliosis is satisfied with current spine-related health, nonoperative treatment is advised, with the understanding that improvement is unlikely. If a patient is not satisfied with current spine health and expects improvement, surgery is preferred. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level II. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Indexed as

Lumbar VertebraeAdultAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleHumansMaleMedication AdherenceMiddle AgedOrthopedic ProceduresScoliosisTreatment OutcomeWatchful Waiting

Identifiers

PMID30801373
PMCPMC6738555

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.