ArticleSpine deformity2022
Do the benefits of hook-hybrid construct justify their use over all-pedicle screws constructs in maintaining postoperative curve correction for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis patients from an Asian population?
Article in Spine deformity, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
STUDY
designRetrospective study.
objective(1) Compare outcomes of all-pedicle screws (PS) and hook-hybrid (H) constructs in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) patients; and (2) investigate whether BMI, height or pedicle size may modify the effect of the type of surgical construct on the extent of curve decompensation.
methodsAIS patients who underwent surgical fixation with H or PS constructs at a single tertiary institution were reviewed. Patients with implant density of at least 70% and 2-year follow-up were included. Demographic and perioperative data collected were age, sex, height, BMI, implant density and pedicle diameter. Cobb's angles and curve correction were compared preoperatively, postoperatively and at follow-up.
resultsIn total, 59 patients were included. H group had a lower pedicle size at the highest level of construct and at T4 compared to PS group. Postoperatively, H group (30.2° ± 11.7°) and PS group (32.1° ± 10.4°) had similar correction (mean diff. 2.0°, p = 0.516). At 2-year follow-up, H group (1.6° ± 3.5°) and PS group (0.1° ± 2.8°) had similar curve deterioration (mean diff. 1.5°, p = 0.079). Uni- and multivariate analyses revealed that BMI and height were not associated with curve deterioration at 2-year follow-up among the H and PS groups.
conclusionH constructs provided similar maintenance of curve correction at 2-year follow-up compared to PS constructs. BMI and Stature did not modify curve deterioration between both groups at follow-up. This study supports the use of H constructs when faced with difficult pedicle morphology associated with shorter stature as it provides comparable and satisfactory long-term maintenance of curve correction. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, retrospective cohort study.
Indexed as
Identifiers
35258845What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.