ArticleJournal of orthopaedic surgery and research2025
Segmental range of motion of vertebral body tethering: an in-vitro analysis of single-tether, double-tether, and hybrid constructs.
Article in Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research, 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
15 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeVertebral Body Tethering (VBT) is emerging as a promising approach for treating Adolescents with Idiopathic Scoliosis. This study aims to address the limited experimental research on vertebral body tethering by examining its biomechanical effects on the segmental spinal range of motion (ROM).
methodsSix human spine samples (T10-L3) were subjected to pure moment testing under four different conditions: native, and instrumentation with single-tether (T10-L3), double-tether (T11-L3), and hybrid (T12-L2) techniques in flexion (FL) and extension (EX), lateral bending (LB), and axial rotation (AR). The intersegmental ROM was measured from sensors inserted in each vertebra using an electromagnetic tracking system.
resultsAll instrumented cases preserved at least 80% of the native segmental ROM during FL-EX for all tested segments. In AR, all segments preserved at least 88% ROM mobility for single-tether and double-tether, or 65% for the hybrid technique. In LB, the ROM was reduced to 55% for a single-tether, 47% for a double-tether, and 29% for a hybrid system. The hybrid construct tended to relatively increase the ROM of adjacent levels near the titanium rod when compared with the single-tether or double-tether.
conclusionThis study provided experimental data on individual segment motion under VBT. The findings indicate that VBT techniques preserve a significant portion of FL-EX and AR ROM for all segments. However, the tested VBT constructs provide stability for the spine in LB.
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.