ReviewSpine deformity2026
Tethered cord syndrome and pediatric scoliosis: workup, natural history, and surgical timing.
Review in Spine deformity, 2026. 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTethered cord syndrome (TCS) is an important consideration in pediatric scoliosis because it can present with curve progression, pain, and evolving neurologic or urologic dysfunction that may affect deformity evaluation and surgical planning. This state-of-the-art review summarizes the current literature on TCS in pediatric spinal deformity, with emphasis on diagnostic workup, scoliosis natural history, and surgical timing relative to deformity correction.
methodsA literature review was performed focusing on pediatric TCS in the setting of spinal deformity, including dysraphism-associated tethering, filum-based tethering, retethering, and occult tethered cord syndrome. Studies addressing diagnosis, neurologic and urologic evaluation, scoliosis progression, outcomes after detethering, and timing relative to deformity correction were synthesized narratively.
resultsCurrent evidence supports a clinically driven approach in which imaging findings alone are not sufficient to define clinically active tethering. Decision-making should focus on interval neurologic or urologic change and scoliosis behavior over time. Detethering may improve or stabilize cord-related symptoms, but it does not reliably prevent scoliosis progression, especially in larger curves and skeletally immature patients. Evidence supporting routine prophylactic detethering before deformity correction in asymptomatic patients remains limited. Variation in diagnostic criteria and outcome reporting continues to limit clear treatment recommendations.
conclusionIn pediatric deformity care, TCS management should be driven by objective clinical progression rather than imaging findings alone. Detethering should be viewed as treatment for active cord-related dysfunction, while scoliosis treatment should be guided by curve progression and skeletal maturity. Standardized definitions and prospective multicenter studies are needed to improve treatment algorithms and reduce practice variation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42334741What 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.