ArticleEuropean spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society2025
Cobb angle estimation without X-ray using angle of trunk rotation and characteristics of unpredictable cases.
Article 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 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Determining the minimal clinically important difference of angle of trunk rotation for monitoring conservatively treated adolescent idiopathic scoliosis.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 · 2026Article
- Impact of Physiotherapy Based on the Rigo Concept and Whole-Body Vibration on Sagittal Spinal Curvatures, Trunk Symmetry, and the Angle of Trunk Rotation in Adolescents with Idiopathic Scoliosis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Deep learning based screening and regular assessment of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis using wearable IMU sensors.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeInvestigate whether Cobb angle can be predicted by angle of trunk rotation (ATR) measurements with a scoliometer and identify the characteristics of hard-to-predict cases.
methodsWe retrospectively analyzed 176 patients who were examined for AIS at our department between 2011 and 2021. The cohort included 160 girls and 16 boys aged 11 years (83 patients) or 12 years (93 patients). ATR was determined with an OSI-Scoliometer (Orthopedic Systems, Inc., Union City, CA, USA). Risser grade, Cobb angle, coronal balance, and clavicular angle were all measured using standing full-length frontal radiographs. Coronal balance was measured as the distance of the C7 plumb line (C7PL) to the central sacral vertebral line. We defined the underestimated group as having a predicted Cobb angle > 1 standard deviation (SD) lower than the actual Cobb angle.
resultsATR and Cobb angle were strongly and positively correlated in the cohort (r = 0.883, P < 0.001). To investigate ATR values for use in treatment decision-making, the determined cut-off value of ATR for > 25° Cobb angle was 7.5° (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve [AUROC]: 0.895, sensitivity: 0.810, specificity: 0.838) and for > 45° Cobb angle was 10.5° (AUROC: 0.941, sensitivity: 1.000, specificity: 0.781). We observed 23 patients in the underestimation group. Actual Cobb angle was significantly higher in the underestimation group, which also included significantly more patients with larger C7PL deviation and with right shoulder up. Logistic regression analysis revealed that the larger the Cobb angle at the time of ATR measurement, the higher the risk of underestimating the Cobb angle in our prediction formula. Specifically, the odds ratio suggests that a 10° increase in the Cobb angle results in a 2.3-fold increase in this risk.
conclusionATR and Cobb angle were strongly correlated, with ATR cut-off values of 7.5° and 10.5° to predict Cobb angle > 25° and > 45°, respectively. Although the accurate prediction of Cobb angle appears difficult, especially for larger curves, this method may be useful in determining the need for bracing or surgical treatment without radiography.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40848157What 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.