ArticleEuropean journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie2026
Anterior release & posterior spinal fusion vs. posterior-only fusion in AIS patients with large magnitude thoracic curves.
Article in European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie, 2026. 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.
- Spine surgery is not a luxury: global perspectives on quality, innovation, and collaboration.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe surgical management of severe adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) remains a subject of ongoing discussion among spine-deformity surgeons. While there has been a prevailing shift towards posterior-only fusion (PF) techniques, anterior release with posterior fusion (ARPF) may still be valuable for the correction of large or stiff curves. This study compared the clinical and radiological outcomes of PF and ARPF in a high-volume spinal deformity unit.
methodsPatients aged 10-18 years with AIS and a major thoracic curve ≥ 70
resultsEighty-nine patients were included (PF = 51; ARPF = 38). Baseline characteristics were similar except ARPF patients were younger (13.7 vs 1.4.8, p = 0.001) and less skeletally mature (Risser 0-2: 60.5% vs 37.3%). Baseline Cobb angle was comparable (p = 0.0634), but ARPF patients had stiffer curves (p = 0.0257), reduced flexibility (p = 0.0408), and achieved a significantly higher CI at final follow-up (248.2% vs. 168.1%, p = 0.0024). Operative time, blood loss and length of stay were greater for ARPF.
conclusionsARPF offers a corrective advantage for patients with stiffer curves and lower skeletal maturity, who are at risk of developing crankshaft phenomena. However, the increased operative morbidity supports PF alone as sufficient for most patients. These results highlight the importance of tailoring surgical strategy to curve characteristics and skeletal maturity to optimise correction and minimise risk.
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.