ArticleSpine deformity2025
Which Lenke type curve is most appropriate for vertebral body tethering in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis?
Article in Spine deformity, 2025. 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeClinical trials have studied the effects of curve magnitude and flexibility, age, and skeletal immaturity on the outcomes of VBT. No studies have assessed the effect of Lenke curve type on the outcomes of VBT. This study compares outcomes in patients who underwent VBT with Lenke type 1, 3, 5, and 6 curves.
methodsSingle center retrospective review of patients undergoing mini-open thoracoscopic-assisted two row vertebral body tethering (2RVBT) for the correction of AIS with a minimum 2-year follow-up were included. Patients were grouped by Lenke type, which yielded 4 groups; types 1, 3, 5, or 6. Analysis included preoperative demographic parameters, as well as radiographic and clinical outcome measures.
results156 2RVBT (Lenke 1, N = 61; Lenke 3, N = 35; Lenke 5, N = 37; Lenke 6, N = 23) patients met inclusion criteria. The mean preoperative apex Cobb angle in the Lenke type 1, 3, 5, and 6 groups were 50.2 ± 9.1, 50.5 ± 10.1, 45.0 ± 8.6, and 49.0 ± 10.8, respectively. This corrected to 21.2 ± 10.2, 19.2 ± 8.5, 13.6 ± 7.2, 18.5 ± 8.3 in Lenke type 1, 3, 5, and 6 groups, respectively, demonstrating that Lenke type 5 saw greatest correction following 2RVBT. With regards to revision recommendation following tether breakage, Lenke type 3 curves were most frequently indicated for fusion, whereas Lenke type 1 curves were most frequently not indicated for revision surgery.
conclusionLenke type 5 curves are the most amenable to correction via 2RVBT, as evident by their lower post-operative apex Cobb angles and lowest rate of recommendation for revision to posterior spinal fusion.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39838244What 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.