ArticleEuropean spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society2026
Would initial thoracic correction be a key factor in orthotic intervention for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis with double-curve?
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, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo investigate the influence of in-orthosis correction on treatment outcomes of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) with double-curve, and to explore baseline radiographic features associated with achieving high in-orthosis correction.
methodsThis retrospective study analyzed 101 skeletally immature patients with double-curve AIS treated with customized thoracic-lumbar-sacral orthosis (TLSO). Radiographic measurements from pre-orthosis standing and supine, first in-orthosis, and final out-of-orthosis follow-up visits were analyzed. Initial in-orthosis correction rates for the thoracic and thoracolumbar/lumbar (TL/L) curves were compared. Patients were dichotomized into high (≥ 38.3%) and low (< 38.3%) thoracic correction groups. An exploratory multivariable analysis was performed to identify baseline radiographic features associated with thoracic correction outcomes.
resultsThoracic curves had significantly lower initial in-orthosis correction than TL/L curves (29.3% vs. 38.6%, p < 0.001). High initial thoracic correction was strongly associated with final treatment success for the thoracic curve (p = 0.009), whereas TL/L curve correction was not (p = 0.250). Thoracic curve progression accounted for 90.9% of treatment failures. Patients who achieved high thoracic correction had nearly eight times the odds of achieving high TL/L correction (OR = 7.89, 95% CI: 2.97-20.90). Five radiographic factors were found to be associated with high correction: greater pre-orthosis lumbar lordosis, higher thoracic and TL/L supine flexibility, lesser thoracic apical sagittal wedging, and a smaller increase in rib-vertebral angle difference (RVAD) from standing to supine. The model showed good discriminatory capacity within the cohort (AUC = 0.862).
conclusionIn AIS with double-curve, inadequate in-orthosis thoracic correction is strongly associated with treatment failure. A set of baseline radiographic features including favorable sagittal alignment, high flexibility, and rib cage stability are associated with successful thoracic correction, generating hypotheses regarding potential biomechanical factors for this limitation which can also serve as a foundation for future research.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42502074What 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.