ArticleAsian spine journal2024
Optimising deformity correction: a retrospective comparative analysis of two techniques in high magnitude curves in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis.
Article in Asian spine journal, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Intraoperative traction in posterior spinal fusion for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis of correction, perioperative, and safety outcomes.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2026Pooled it
- Letter to the Editor: Optimizing deformity correction: a retrospective comparative analysis of two techniques in high-magnitude curves in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis.Asian spine journal · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
STUDY
designA retrospective comparative study. PURPOSE: To validate the hypothesis that a combination of multilevel Ponte osteotomy (PO) with intraoperative traction (IOT) results in a better correction than IOT alone in high-magnitude curves in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) and does not possess an attributable risk of neurological injury. OVERVIEW OF LITERATURE: On a comprehensive review of the literature, the choice of technique adopted for curves between 65° and 100° remains controversial with no major consensus favoring one technique over the other.
methodsTwenty-four patients with AIS (Cobb >65°) underwent surgery at a single center between January 2014 and December 2021. The first 10 patients underwent surgery using only IOT (T group), whereas the subsequent 14 patients underwent surgery with a combination of IOT and PO (TP group).
resultsThe mean preoperative Cobb angles in the T and TP groups were 89.35°±6.05° and 92.32°±9.28°, respectively (p=0.59). The mean flexibility index (FI) of the T and TP groups were 0.31±0.016 and 0.36±0.03, respectively (p=0.41). The mean postoperative Cobb angle in the T and TP groups were 40.25°±5.95° and 19.1°±3.20°, respectively (p=0.041). Apical vertebral rotation improved from mean grade 3.2 (2-4) to grade 2.6 (1-3) in the T group and from mean grade 3.6 (2-4) to mean grade 1.8 (1-3) in the TP group. Postoperatively, the mean thoracic kyphosis was 13.84°±2.10° and 21.02°±1.68° in T and TP groups (p=0.044). Transient signal-loss intraoperatively was noted in two patients, one in each group. No episodes of postoperative neurological deficits were reported. No incidences of pseudarthrosis/implant-related complications were reported at the end of 2 years in either group.
conclusionsIOT and PO complement one another and can be safely combined without an attributable risk of neurological injury.
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.