ArticleSpine deformity2024
Growth modulation response in vertebral body tethering depends primarily on magnitude of concave vertebral body growth.
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 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Toward biomechanically optimized intraoperative correction in lumbar vertebral body tethering.Spine deformity · 2026Article
- The magnitude of postoperative anterior vertebral body tethering scoliosis correction as measured by inter-screw angulation is dependent on the remaining growth potential at the time of surgery.Spine deformity · 2026Article
- Preoperative Fulcrum Flexibility >80% Is Associated With Clinical Success in Vertebral Body Tethering.Global spine journal · 2026Article
- Patient-specific biomechanical modeling of intraoperative scoliosis correction on the 2-year outcomes for thoracolumbar/lumbar vertebral body tethering.Spine deformity · 2026Article
- Multicenter validation of a surgical planning tool for lumbar vertebral body tethering simulating growth modulation over 2 years.Spine deformity · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThere is variability in clinical outcomes with vertebral body tethering (VBT) partly due to a limited understanding of the growth modulation (GM) response. We used the largest sample of patients with 3D spine reconstructions to characterize the vertebra and disc morphologic changes that accompany growth modulation during the first two years following VBT.
methodsA multicenter registry was used to identify idiopathic scoliosis patients who underwent VBT with 2 years of follow-up. Calibrated biplanar X-rays obtained at longitudinal timepoints underwent 3D reconstruction to obtain precision morphological measurements. GM was defined as change in instrumented coronal angulation from post-op to 2-years.
resultsFifty patients (mean age: 12.5 ± 1.3yrs) were analyzed over a mean of 27.7 months. GM was positively correlated with concave vertebra height growth (r = 0.57, p < 0.001), 3D spine length growth (r = 0.36, p = 0.008), and decreased convex disc height (r = - 0.42, p = 0.002). High modulators (patients experiencing GM > 10°) experienced an additional 1.6 mm (229% increase) of mean concave vertebra growth during study period compared to the Poor Modulators (GM < - 10°) group, (2.3 vs. 0.7 mm, p = 0.039), while convex vertebra height growth was similar (1.3 vs. 1.4 mm, p = 0.91).
conclusionWhen successful, VBT enables asymmetric vertebra body growth, leading to continued postoperative coronal angulation correction (GM). A strong GM response is correlated with concave vertebral body height growth and overall instrumented spine growth. A poor GM response is associated with an increase in convex disc height (suspected tether rupture). Future studies will investigate the patient and technique-specific factors that influence increased growth remodeling.
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.