ArticleSICOT-J2025
Surgical outcomes and complication rates in severe scoliosis: a systematic review.
Article in SICOT-J, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Thoracic pedicle Subtraction osteotomies: a systematic review of indications, correction magnitudes, and safety profile.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 · 2026Pooled it
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
backgroundCorrecting severe scoliosis is challenging due to curve rigidity and risks to cardiopulmonary and neurologic function. Osteotomy techniques offer greater correction but carry higher complication rates, while non-osteotomy methods may be safer but less effective. This systematic review compares outcomes between osteotomy and non-osteotomy approaches in treating severe idiopathic scoliosis.
methodsA systematic search was conducted in PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library using MeSH terms related to "idiopathic adolescent scoliosis", "AIS", "severe scoliosis", and "surgical outcome". The review followed PRISMA guidelines.
resultsAn initial search yielded 565 studies, of which 23 studies (n = 932 patients) met the inclusion criteria. The Vertebral Column Resection (VCR) group achieved the greatest spinal correction, with a mean Cobb angle of 106.7 ± 9.7° and a correction rate of 62.1%, but also had the highest complication rate at 24%. Non-osteotomy methods provided similar correction (107.0 ± 9.1°, 61.5%) with a slightly lower complication rate of 19.6%. The Ponte osteotomy group had the lowest complication rate (4%) with a moderate level of correction (107.4 ± 10.5°, 60.3%). In terms of functional outcomes, the non-osteotomy group reported the highest SRS-22r scores, averaging 4.3.
conclusionVCR offers the most significant curve correction, but with a higher complication rate. Ponte osteotomy provides a safer alternative with acceptable clinical outcomes. In contrast, non-osteotomy techniques strike a balance between correction and risk, with favorable functional results.
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.