ArticleSpine deformity2023
Isolated main thoracic curve fusion in idiopathic scoliosis: optimizing radiographic outcomes using lumbar modifiers to guide correction.
Article in Spine deformity, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeDoes differential correction of main thoracic curve (MTC) and instrumented LIV angulation based on lumbar modifiers affect radiographic outcomes, and can preoperative supine AP radiograph be used to guide correction for optimal final radiographic alignment.
methodsRetrospective analysis of idiopathic scoliosis patients who underwent selective thoracic fusions (LIV T11-L1) for Lenke 1 and 2 curve patterns, < 18 years of age. 2-year minimum follow-up. Optimal outcome meant LIV + 1 of < 5 degrees disk-wedging and C7-CSVL < 2 cm. 82 patients met inclusion criteria (70% female), mean age 14.1 years.
results24 patients were A modifier, 21 B modifier, and 37 C modifier. There were 52 optimal and 30 suboptimal outcomes. LIV was not associated with outcome (p = 0.08). For optimal outcomes, A modifiers' MTC improved 65%, B modifiers 65%, and C modifiers 59%. C modifiers' MTC correction was less than A modifiers (p = 0.03) but equivalent to B modifiers' (p = 0.10). A modifiers' LIV + 1 tilt improved 65%, B modifiers 64%, and C modifiers 56%. C modifiers' instrumented LIV angulation was greater than A modifiers' (p < 0.01) but equivalent to B modifiers' (p = 0.06). Preoperative supine LIV + 1 tilt was 16
conclusionDifferential MTC and LIV tilt correction based on lumbar modifier may be a valid goal. Optimizing radiographic outcome by matching instrumented LIV angulation to preoperative supine LIV + 1 tilt could not be proven. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV.
Indexed as
Identifiers
36811706What 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.