ArticleSpine deformity2026
Is myelomeningocele a distinct subgroup within neuromuscular early-onset scoliosis (M-EOS)? A clinical and radiographic comparison after graduation from growing rod treatment.
Article 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe aim was to compare clinical and radiographic outcomes between myelomeningocele (MMC) and other neuromuscular early-onset scoliosis (EOS) patients following graduation from growing rod treatment and to evaluate whether MMC should be considered a distinct subgroup within the classification of EOS.
methodsThis single-center retrospective cohort study included 26 patients with neuromuscular EOS (10 with MMC, 16 with other neuromuscular etiologies) treated with traditional or magnetically controlled growing rods between 2004 and 2023, all of whom achieved graduation and had a minimum of 2-year of post-graduation follow-up. Demographic, clinical, radiographic, and complication data were analyzed. Complication burden was assessed using unplanned return to the operating room (UPROR), modified Clavien-Dindo-Sink grading, and negative binomial regression.
resultsWound-related complications were significantly more frequent in the MMC group (80.0% vs. 6.2%, p = 0.002). The MMC patients had a higher complication burden (mean 3.3 ± 2.3 vs. 0.9 ± 1.4, p = 0.003), more multiple reoperations (≥ 2 UPROR: 70.0% vs. 0.0%, p = 0.007), more severe complications (modified Clavien-Dindo-Sink grade 3b: 70.0% vs. 25.0%, p = 0.016), and a 3.52-fold higher overall complication rate (IRR = 3.52, 95% CI 1.63-10.80). Spinal growth and sagittal alignment were also significantly compromised in the MMC patients.
conclusionMMC patients demonstrate a markedly distinct complication profile and clinical trajectory compared to other neuromuscular EOS patients, supporting consideration of MMC as a separate subgroup within EOS classification systems to improve risk stratification and guide individualized treatment. Even within the current framework, recognizing MMC through a diagnosis-specific modifier may offer a practical means of improving risk stratification without requiring structural reclassification.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42768186What 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.