SynthesisEuropean spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society2025
Impact of surgical treatment for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis on maternal and obstetric outcomes: a meta-analysis.
Synthesis in European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society, 2025. 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo compare the maternal and obstetric health outcomes between pregnant AIS patients treated surgically (AIS surgery), pregnant AIS patients treated conservatively (AIS conservative), and pregnant healthy controls.
methodsA systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted according to the PRISMA guidelines (PROSPERO: CRD42023439219). PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, and Cochrane Collaboration Library databases were searched for relevant studies. The risk ratios (RR) and mean differences (MD) were calculated for dichotomous and continuous variables. Heterogeneity was assessed using the chi2 and I2 tests. A fixed-effects or random-effects model was used based on heterogeneity results.
resultsNine studies involving 4718 women were included. The frequency of caesarean section was higher in the AIS surgery group than in the healthy controls (RR 1.54, 95% CI 1.19 to 1.99), but not compared to the AIS conservative group (RR 1.28, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.69). Patients in the AIS surgery group were more likely to receive general anesthesia during caesarean section than were healthy controls (RR 11.69, 95% CI 3.03 45.13). Patients in the AIS surgery group reported more back pain during pregnancy than healthy controls (RR 4.02, 95% CI 1.20 to 13.49), but not compared to the AIS conservative group (RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.58 1.15). The AIS surgery group had worse scores on the SRS-22 pain and function domains than the healthy controls. There were no differences in marital status or the number of children between the groups.
conclusionPregnant AIS patients treated surgically may have a higher risk of caesarean section and more back pain during pregnancy compared to healthy controls. The AIS surgery group also had worse scores on the SRS-22 pain and function domains than the healthy controls. However, there were no differences in marital status or number of children between the groups.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39988611What 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.