ArticleOrthopaedic surgery2024
A Novel Deformity Correction Manipulation System for Better Correction of Large Thoracic Scoliosis.
Article in Orthopaedic surgery, 2024. 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTreating patients with large thoracic scoliosis (between 70° and 100°) poses technical challenges, particularly with traditional correction techniques (TCT). To address this, we developed a novel deformity correction manipulation system (DCMS) aimed at reducing surgical complexity and trauma. This study aims to assess the safety and effectiveness of DCMS in treating large thoracic scoliosis.
methodsFrom January 2016 to June 2021, 76 patients with large thoracic scoliosis were included in this retrospective study. The patients were divided into two groups: DCMS (n = 34) and TCT (n = 42). Basic patient data including age at surgery, sex, etiology, Risser sign, flexibility of the main thoracic curve, instrumented levels, number of screws, duration of hospital stay, and follow-up time were collected and analyzed. Radiographic and clinical outcomes, as measured by various radiographic parameters and Scoliosis Research Society-30 (SRS-30) scores, were retrospectively analyzed and compared between the two groups. Adverse events were also documented. Statistical analyses were performed using two-tailed independent t-tests, chi-square tests, and Fisher's exact test.
resultsThe DCMS group exhibited significantly shorter operative times, reduced blood loss, and shorter hospital stays compared to the TCT group. However, there were no significant differences between the two groups in terms of age at surgery, sex, etiology, Risser sign, flexibility of the main curve, instrumented levels, number of screws, and follow-up time. While preoperative major curves were statistically similar between the two groups, the DCMS group achieved a superior correction rate compared to the TCT group (74.2% ± 8.8% vs 68.1% ± 10.5%). No significant differences were observed in other radiographic parameters, SRS-30 scores, or the incidence of adverse events.
conclusionThe application of DCMS resulted in shorter operative times, reduced blood loss, shorter hospital stays, and greater curve correction compared to TCT. DCMS proves to be a safe and effective technique for treating large thoracic curves.
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.