A new method for the treatment of scoliosis is described in which a metal system of rods and hooks is implanted, and distraction and compression forces applied, to correct the curve and stabilize the treated segments in the corrected position by skeletal fixation. The technique and principles of this method of treatment and a summary of the preliminary results are given.

JBJS classics: Treatment of scoliosis: Correction and internal fixation by spine instrumentation

Study Design. Literature review. Objective. To establish consistent parameters for future adolescent idiopathic scoliosis bracing studies so that valid and reliable comparisons can be made. of Background Data. Current bracing literature lacks consistency for both inclusion criteria and the definitions of brace effectiveness. Methods. A total of 32 brace treatment studies and the current bracing in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis proposal were analyzed to: (1) determine inclusion criteria that will best identify those patients most at risk for progression, (2) determine the most appropriate definitions for bracing effectiveness, and (3) identify additional variables that would provide valuable information. Results. Early brace studies lacked clarity in their inclusion criteria. In more recent studies, inclusion criteria have narrowed considerably to include primarily those patients most at risk for curve progression who may benefit from the use of a brace. Brace effectiveness was usually defined by various degrees of curve progression at maturity. Less frequently, it was defined by the resultant curve magnitude at maturity, whether or not surgical intervention was needed, or if there was change to another brace. Conclusions. Optimal inclusion criteria for future adolescent idiopathic scoliosis brace studies consist of: age is 10 years or older when brace is prescribed, Risser 0-2, primary curve angles 25°-40°, no prior treatment, and, if female, either premenarchal or less than 1 year postmenarchal. Assessment of brace effectiveness should include: (1) the percentage of patients who have ≤5° curve progression and the percentage of patients who have a6° progression at maturity, (2) the percentage of patients with curves exceeding 45° at maturity and the percentage who have had surgery recommended/undertaken, and (3) 2-year follow-up beyond maturity to determine the percentage of patients who subsequently undergo surgery. All patients, regardless of subjective reports on compliance, should be included in the results (intent to treat). Every study should provide results stratified by curve type and size grouping.

/pdf/standardization-of-criteria-for-adolescent-idiopathic-5gspg2h4gm.pdf

Standardization of criteria for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis brace studies: SRS Committee on Bracing and Nonoperative Management.

With use of data culled from twenty studies, members of the Prevalence and Natural History Committee of the Scoliosis Research Society conducted a meta-analysis of 1910 patients who had been managed with bracing (1459 patients), lateral electrical surface stimulation (322 patients), or observation (129 patients) because of idiopathic scoliosis. Three variables - the type of treatment, the level of maturity, and the criterion for failure - were analyzed to determine which had the greatest impact on the outcome. We also examined the effect of the type of brace that was used and the duration of bracing on the success of treatment. The number of failures of treatment in each study was determined by calculating the total number of patients who had unacceptable progression of the curve (as defined in the study), who could not comply with or tolerate treatment, or who had an operation. The percentage of patients who completed a given course of treatment without failure, adjusted for the sample sizes of the studies in which that treatment was used, yielded the weighted mean proportion of success for that treatment. The weighted mean proportion of success was 0.39 for lateral electrical surface stimulation, 0.49 for observation only, 0.60 for bracing for eight hours per day, 0.62 for bracing for sixteen hours per day, and 0.93 for bracing for twenty-three hours per day. The twenty-three-hour regimens were significantly more successful than any other treatment (p < 0.0001). The difference between the eight and sixteen-hour regimens was not significant, with the numbers available. Although lateral electrical surface stimulation was associated with a lower weighted mean proportion of success than observation only, the difference was not significant, with the numbers available. This meta-analysis demonstrates the effectiveness of bracing for the treatment of idiopathic scoliosis. The weighted mean proportion of success for the six types of braces included in this review was 0.92, with the highest proportion (0.99) achieved with the Milwaukee brace. We found that use of the Milwaukee brace or another thoracolumbosacral orthosis for twenty-three hours per day effectively halted progression of the curve. Bracing for eight or sixteen hours per day was found to be significantly less effective than bracing for twenty-three hours per day (p < 0.0001).

A meta-analysis of the efficacy of non-operative treatments for idiopathic scoliosis.

Scoliosis: Review of diagnosis and treatment.

Background: The efficacy of brace treatment for patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis remains controversial, and effectiveness remains unproven. We accurately measured the number of hours of brace wear for patients with this condition to determine if increased wear correlated with lack of curve progression.

Methods: Of 126 patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis curves measuring between 25° and 45°, 100 completed a prospective study in which they were managed with a Boston brace fitted with a heat sensor that measured the exact number of hours of brace wear. Orthopaedic teams prescribed either sixteen or twenty-three hours of brace wear and were blinded to the wear data. At the completion of treatment, the number of hours of brace wear were compared with the frequency of curve progression of ≥6° and with curve progression requiring surgery.

Results: The total number of hours of brace wear correlated with the lack of curve progression. This effect was most significant in patients who were at Risser stage 0 (p = 0.0003) or Risser stage 1 (p = 0.07) at the beginning of treatment and in patients with an open triradiate cartilage at the beginning of treatment. Logistic regression analyses showed a “dose-response” curve in which the greater number of hours of brace wear correlated with lack of curve progression. Brace wear to school and immediately afterward was most successful. Curves did not progress in 82% of patients who wore the brace more than twelve hours per day, compared with only 31% of those who wore the brace fewer than seven hours per day (p = 0.0005). The number of hours of brace wear also correlated inversely with the need for surgical treatment (p = 0.0005). The number of hours of wear were similar for the patients who were advised to wear the brace sixteen or twenty-three hours daily.

Conclusions: The Boston brace is an effective means of controlling curve progression in patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis when worn for more than twelve hours per day.

Level of Evidence: Therapeutic Level II. See Instructions to Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Brace Wear Control of Curve Progression in Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis

The long-term effect of Boston brace treatment was investigated by computed tomography measurements before treatment, after bracing, and at mean follow-up at 8.5 years in 25 patients with idiopathic scoliosis. At follow-up, the pretreatment Cobb angle, the vertebral rotation, the rib hump, and the translation of the apical vertebra were not significantly changed. The sagittal diameter of the thoracic cage was significantly decreased at follow-up. The current study demonstrates that the Boston brace does not improve, but prevents progression of vertebral rotation, translation, rib hump, and Cobb angle in idiopathic scoliosis. The reduced sagittal diameter is noteworthy and may be of importance for cosmesis and pulmonary function.

Long-term results of Boston brace treatment on vertebral rotation in idiopathic scoliosis.

The rotation and structural changes of the apex vertebra in the horizontal plane as well as of the thoracic cage deformity were quantified by measurements on computed tomography (CT) scans from patients with right convex thoracic idiopathic scoliosis (IS). The CT scans were obtained from 12 patients with moderate scoliosis (mean Cobb angle 25.8°, r 13°–30°) and from 33 with severe scoliosis (mean Cobb angle 46.2°, r 35°–71°). In addition, CT scans of thoracic vertebrae from 15 patients without scoliosis were used as reference material. Ten of the scoliotic cases had had Cotrel-Dubousset instrumentation (CDI) and posterior fusion and had entered a longitudinal study on the effect of operative correction on the re-modelling of the apical vertebra. An increasingly asymmetrical vertebral body, transverse process angle, pedicle width and canal width were found in the groups with scoliosis as compared with the reference material. Vertebral rotation and rib hump index were significantly larger in patients with early and advanced scoliosis than in normal subjects. The modelling angle of the vertebral body, the transverse process angle index and the vertebral rotation in relation to the middle axis of the thoracic cage were significantly greater in patients with severe than with moderate scoliosis. The results of this longitudinal study suggest that the structural changes of the apical vertebra regress 2 years or more after CD instrumentation.

Structural vertebral changes in the horizontal plane in idiopathic scoliosis and the long-term corrective effect of spine instrumentation.

The concave and convex rib-vertebral angle (RVA) at levels T2–T12 was measured on AP radiographs of 19 patients with right convex idiopathic thoracic scoliosis and 10 patients with major thoracic right convex neuromuscular scoliosis. The difference between the angles on the concave and the convex sides, the RVAD, was calculated. The RVAs were also measured on radiographs from three animal groups in which spinal curves had been induced experimentally in a variety of ways. Group 1 comprised 16 rabbits that had been subjected to selective electrostimulation of the latissimus dorsi, the erector spinae and the intercostal muscles. Group 2 comprised four dead rabbits whose spines had been subjected to manual bending. Group 3 comprised eight rabbits that had undergone mechanical elongation of one rib. In both the idiopathic and the neuromuscular group, the convex RVA was smaller than the concave RVA between levels T2 and T8, with a maximal difference between T4 to T5. From T9 to T12 the concave RVA was smaller than the convex. The RVA in relation to the scoliotic segment, i.e. the apex level of the curve and the two neighbouring vertebrae above and below this level, showed similar results. With increasing Cobb angle the RVADs increased linearly with the greatest difference at the second vertebra above the apex. In the three experimental groups the pattern of the RVADs between T6 to T12 was basically similar to the findings of the clinical study. From the results of these clinical and experimental studies, it is concluded that the typical pattern of the RVAs on the concave and convex sides seems to be independent of the underlying cause of the spinal curvature. It is likely that the RVADs result from a passive mechanical adaptation of the ribs to the lateral curvature of the spine.

Rib-vertebral angle asymmetry in idiopathic, neuromuscular and experimentally induced scoliosis

Scoliosis induced immediately after mechanical medial rib elongation in the rabbit

A new method is presented for stereological evaluation of the volume of the vertebral body in vivo. The height of the vertebral body is measured at three standardised points on an anteroposterior radiograph and at two other points on a lateral one. The area of the body is also measured using a special grid superimposed on a CT scan from the middle part of the vertebra. The volume of the vertebral body is then calculated using Cavalieri’s principle for irregular objects: V = Δa×H, where V is the volume of the vertebral body, Δa is the mean cross-section surface area on the CT scan and H is the mean of the heights at the five points on the radiographs, computed as mean weighted circumferential height. The volume of one normal and one scoliotic vertebra was evaluated in vitro using this formula. The obtained values were compared with the values derived from serial CT scans of the two vertebrae. The results showed that the volume of the normal vertebra measured with our new method was 15.9 cm3 and measured with serial CT scans using the same grid it was 15.07 cm3. For the scoliotic vertebra the values were 17.6 and 17.3 cm3, respectively. The degree of accuracy of the measurements with the presented method as compared with the serial CT method was 95% for the normal and 98.5% for the scoliotic vertebra. To prove the clinical applicability of the method, the heights of the apical and of the upper and the lower end vertebrae of the curve and the volume of the apical vertebrae were evaluted in eight scoliotic girls (nine curves) before and 3 years after spinal instrumentation and posterior fusion. The results showed that the mean circumferential height of the three vertebrae had increased significantly at the last follow-up. The volume of the apical vertebra had also increased, but the difference was not significant. It is concluded that the described method is easy to apply and has satisfactory accuracy for in vivo longitudinal studies of the volume of the vertebral body on radiographs and CT scans.

/pdf/volumetric-determination-of-normal-and-scoliotic-vertebral-2jtcwcaqex.pdf

Volumetric determination of normal and scoliotic vertebral bodies.

Handle everyday research tasks with reliable, citation-backed results

Your personal Research Agent to handle research tasks with citation-backed results

Popular Tasks used by Researchers

How can I help with your research?

Meet SciSpace

Get more enhanced response by uploading the PDFs you want me to reference.

No relevant PDFs in your library

SciSpace is the AI research assistant for academics. Run systematic literature reviews on 280M+ papers, and write papers with cited sources. Trusted by 1M+ students, PhDs & researchers.

SciSpace | AI for Research

Analyze PDFs

Code & Manuscripts

Funding & Grants

Literature & Patents

Medical & Clinical Data

Systematic Review

Visualize & Present

Web & Data

Build a Google Scholar-like website for your research.

Build a website

Create charts and images for your research

Create a Chart

Write a paper for submission to a journal

Draft a manuscript

Patent Search

Design eye-catching scientific posters in minutes.

Scientific Poster Generation

Systematic Literature Review

One task is running at the moment. Your messages will be shown right after.

Drag and drop or click here to browse

Loved by <highlight>1 million+</highlight> researchers

Extract a list of specific topics and their sources from unstructured text

Topics

Compare and analyze relevant papers that matches with your search

Papers

Get insights from PDFs and bookmarked papers from your library

My library

Recent searches

Try searching for:

Catch AI-generated content in scholarly and non-scholarly content

{ai} Detector

Ai Writer

Get PDF Summaries, highlighted text explanations 

Chat with PDF

Effortlessly create in-text citations and bibliographies in APA and 2,500 other formats

Citation generator

Get explanations, summaries, and answers on academic papers

Ease up your research workflow with {scispace}'s cohort of exciting AI tools

Elevate your academic writing skills and convey your ideas the way you want

Paraphraser

Explore our range of reading and writing tools

Your file is being prepared and should be ready in a few minutes. If it's a large file, it might take a bit longer. You can close this window, and we'll email you the file when it's done.

You have reached a maximum limit of <strong>{limit}</strong> columns in the table. Remove at least <strong>1</strong> column to add or create another one.

U. Willers

Author Tools

Chat about Author