ArticleSpine deformity2025
Outcomes after vertebral body tethering for Lenke type 5 scoliosis continue to improve: analysis of different surgical techniques.
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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeVertebral Body Tethering (VBT) is a motion-preserving surgical technique for treating adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS), particularly for thoracolumbar (TL) curves. While the technique has demonstrated potential benefits, its outcomes remain less predictable compared to posterior spinal fusion (PSF), with complications, such as tether breakages and revision surgeries. This study evaluates the impact of surgical experience and implant modifications on the outcomes of TL VBT for Lenke type 5 curves.
methodsA retrospective analysis was performed on all consecutive AIS patients who underwent TL VBT from 2017 to 2022. The cohort was divided into three groups based on surgical technique and implant evolution: Group 1 (single-tether), Group 2 (double-tether), and Group 3 (advanced experience with 2nd generation implants). Radiographic outcomes, success rates (defined as a postoperative Cobb angle ≤ 30°), and complications were analysed at 1- and 2-year follow-ups.
results30 patients were included. Average correction rates were 53.7%, 62.6%, 71.2% for groups 1, 2, and 3. Group 3 had a 100% success rate at 2 years, compared to 42.9% in Group 1 and 40% in Group 2 (P = 0.010). Early tether breakage rate (at 1 year) significantly correlated with experience (85.7% vs. 40% vs. 12.5%). Revision rate was 28.6% for Group 1 and 0 for groups 2 and 3.
conclusionsThese findings suggest that advanced surgical techniques and improved implants are key to achieving superior radiological outcomes and reducing revision rates.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40522620What 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.