ArticleBrain & spine2024
Coronal alignment in normal individuals and moderate scoliosis: Normative values, variation with age and comparison with sagittal alignment.
Article in Brain & spine, 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.
- Ultrasound-based assessment of spinal muscle thickness and elasticity in patients with idiopathic scoliosis.The ultrasound journal · 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Global coronal alignment is mainly assessed by C7 plumbline and central sacral vertical line (CSVL), pelvic obliquity and shoulder alignment. A detailed analysis is mandatory when treating spinal deformity. It remains unclear to what extent mild scoliosis influences global coronal alignment. Research question: The objective was to define a comprehensive set of coronal alignment parameters and to investigate differences between individuals without spinal deformity and with mild scoliosis. The relationship between coronal and sagittal alignment and the influence of age were studied. Methods: Radiographs of 236 normal individuals (Group N) and 140 patients with scoliosis <35° (Group S) were prospectively collected. Coronal parameters were femoral head distance and angle, pelvic obliquity, Maloney angle, L4 and L5 inclinations, coronal T1 pelvic angle, C7-CSVL and odontoid CSVL offset, coracoid distance and angle. Sagittal cervical, spinopelvic, thoracolumbar and global parameters were measured. Results: There was no significant difference between groups N and S for coronal parameters, except for L4 and L5 inclinations with a mean difference of 3,3° (p < 0,001). Global coronal alignment kept constant throughout age groups in N and S groups. Sagittal parameters varied with age: C2-C7 lordosis (p < 0,001), T1-T12 kyphosis (p < 0,001), pelvic incidence (p < 0,001). There was no correlation between global coronal and sagittal alignment: R-values ranging from -0.2 to 0.2. Conclusion: Global coronal parameters were comparable in normal individuals and in scoliosis <35°. Coronal plane parameters were not influenced by age. Sagittal plane parameters varied significantly with age. There was no direct link between coronal et sagittal alignment.
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.