ArticleSpine deformity2022
A comparison of the reliability and vulnerability of 3D sterEOS and 2D EOS when measuring the sagittal spinal alignment of patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis.
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 7 papers, 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Patient and surgical predictors of 3D correction in posterior spinal fusion: a systematic review.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 · 2023Pooled it
- Reliability of the Biomechanical Assessment of the Sagittal Thoracic Spine on Radiographs Used in Clinical Practice: A Systematic Literature Review.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Correlation/Compatibility of DIERS postural analysis data with radiographic findings in patients with idiopathic scoliosis.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 · 2025Article
- Sagittal Realignment Following Decompression for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis in Elderly Patients: A Comprehensive EOS Imaging Analysis.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Imaging study of coccygeal morphology in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Article
- Three-Dimensional Spinal Evaluation Using Rasterstereography in Patients with Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis: Is It Closer to Three-Dimensional or Two-Dimensional Radiography?Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeAn essential component of making the diagnosis of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) is standing anteroposterior and lateral radiographs. Two-dimensional (2D) radiographs inevitably fail to reflect every plane of the three-dimensional (3D) deformity in scoliosis. We have tested the hypothesis that there is no difference in the assessment of the sagittal plane deformity when measured with either 2D or 3D EOS radiography.
methodsA retrospective radiographic analysis was performed on patients diagnosed with AIS, with subdivided into three groups according to the coronal angular deformity (mild group: 45°-69°, moderate group: 70°-89°, and severe group: 90° +). The sagittal parameters were compared between manual measurement with 2D sterEOS and those made using computer-aided 3D reconstruction.
resultsFifty-two patients were included in each group. The inter-study reliability when measuring the thoracic Kyphosis (TK) and lumbar lordosis (LL) between the two study modalities was excellent in mild group (ICC: 0.90, 95% CI 0.82 ~ 0.94 and ICC: 0.84, 95% CI 0.74 ~ 0.91), excellent in TK and fair in LL in moderate group (ICC: 0.76, 95% CI 0.61 ~ 0.85 and ICC: 0.70, 95% CI 0.53 ~ 0.81), and fair in TK and LL in severe group, respectively (ICC: 0.74, 95% CI 0.57 ~ 0.84 and ICC: 0.65, 95% CI 0.46 ~ 0.84). A Bland-Altman plot showed proportional bias in TK measurements in each group and LL in moderate group, which means the measured value is underestimated in 2D method when the angle is small.
conclusion3D sterEOS is less vulnerable to the influence of coronal plane than 2D EOS in evaluating the sagittal spinal parameters of patients with a coronal deformity exceeding 70°. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4:
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.