ArticleSpine deformity2024
Correlation of transverse rotation of the spine using surface topography and 3D reconstructive radiography in children with idiopathic scoliosis.
Article in Spine deformity, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe relationship between axial surface rotation (ASR) measured by surface topography (ST) and axial vertebral rotation (AVR) measured by radiography in the transverse plane is not well defined. This study aimed to: (1) quantify ASR and AVR patterns and their magnitudes from T1 to L5; (2) determine the correlation or agreement between the ASR and AVR; and (3) investigate the relationship between axial rotation differences (ASR-AVR) and major Cobb angle.
methodsThis is a retrospective study evaluating patients (age 8-18) with IS or spinal asymmetry with both radiographic and ST measurements. Demographics, descriptive analysis, and correlations and agreements between ASR and AVR were evaluated. A piecewise linear regression model was further created to relate rotational differences to Cobb angle.
resultsFifty-two subjects met inclusion criteria. Mean age was 14.1 ± 1.7 and 39 (75%) were female. Looking at patterns, AVR had maximal rotation at T8, while ASR had maximal rotation at T11 (r = 0.35, P = .006). Cobb angle was 24.1° ± 13.3° with AVR of - 1° ± 4.6° and scoliotic angle was 20.9° ± 11.5° with ASR of - 2.3° ± 6.6°. (ASR-AVR) vs Cobb angle was found to be very weakly correlated with a curve of less than 38.8° (r = 0.15, P = .001).
conclusionOur preliminary findings support that ASR measured by ST has a weak correlation with estimation of AVR by 3D radiographic reconstruction. This correlation may further help us to understand the application of transverse rotation in some clinical scenarios such as specific casting manipulation, padding mechanism in brace, and surgical correction of rib deformity.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38403800What 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.