Document Detail

Comparison of the sagittal profiles among thoracic idiopathic scoliosis patients with different Cobb angles and growth potentials.
Jump to Full Text
MedLine Citation:
PMID:  24635839     Owner:  NLM     Status:  Publisher    
Abstract/OtherAbstract:
BACKGROUND: Previous studies have demonstrated that pelvic incidence and sacral slope are significantly greater in idiopathic scoliosis patients compared with normal adolescents. However, whether these sagittal parameters are related to the progression of scoliosis remain unknown. The present was designed to determine the differences in the sagittal profiles among thoracic idiopathic scoliosis patients with different potentials for curve progression.
METHODS: Ninety-seven outpatient idiopathic scoliosis patients enrolled from June 2008 to June 2011 were divided to three groups according to different Cobb angles and growth potentials: (1) non-progression of thoracic curve group, Risser sign of 5 and Cobb's angle < 40[degree sign]; (2) moderate progression of thoracic curve group, Risser sign of 5 and Cobb's angle >= 40[degree sign]; and (3) severe progression of thoracic curve group, Risser sign <= 3 and Cobb's angle >= 40[degree sign]. All patients underwent whole spinal anteroposterior and lateral X-ray in standing position, and the sagittal parameters were measured, including thoracic kyphosis, lumbar lordosis, sacral slope, pelvic incidence, and pelvic tilt.
RESULTS: The average thoracic scoliosis Cobb's angle in the non-progression group was significantly less than that in the moderate progression group (P < 0.01) and severe progression group (P < 0.01), but there was no statistical difference in the average thoracic scoliosis Cobb's angle between the severe progression group and moderate progression group. The average thoracic kyphosis angle in the severe progression group (9[degree sign] +/- 4[degree sign]) was significantly smaller than that in the non-progression group (18[degree sign] +/- 6[degree sign], P < 0.01) and moderate progression group (14[degree sign] +/- 5[degree sign], P < 0.05). No statistical differences were present in the average lumbar lordosis, sacral slope, pelvic incidence, and pelvic tilt among the three groups.
CONCLUSIONS: Thoracic hypokyphosis is strongly related with the curve progression in thoracic idiopathic scoliosis patients, but not pelvic sagittal profiles.
Authors:
Bo Ran; Guo-You Zhang; Feng Shen; Jia-Yu Chen; Ji-Bin Wu; Feng-Chao Zhao; Kai-Jin Guo; Dun-Yi Qi; Bing Zhou; Xiang-Yang Chen; Xin-Zhu Zhang; Yue-Hua Qiao; Ming Li
Related Documents :
11597529 - Hand-assisted laparoscopic radical nephrectomy: comparison to open radical nephrectomy.
17576519 - Operative treatment of ventral hernia using prosthetic materials.
17333509 - Flank hernia and bulging after open nephrectomy: mesh repair by flank or median approac...
25008459 - Evolution of benign thyroid nodules under levothyroxine non-suppressive therapy.
9667709 - Prospective randomized controlled trial to compare skin staples and polypropylene for s...
17604409 - An observational study of cholecystectomy in patients receiving tegaserod.
15255849 - Operation for pelvic organ prolapse: a follow-up study.
16178009 - Topiramate augmentation in treatment-resistant obsessive-compulsive disorder: a retrosp...
20082209 - The oncology treatment of patients who use oral anticoagulants is connected with high r...
Publication Detail:
Type:  JOURNAL ARTICLE     Date:  2014-3-17
Journal Detail:
Title:  Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research     Volume:  9     ISSN:  1749-799X     ISO Abbreviation:  J Orthop Surg Res     Publication Date:  2014 Mar 
Date Detail:
Created Date:  2014-3-18     Completed Date:  -     Revised Date:  -    
Medline Journal Info:
Nlm Unique ID:  101265112     Medline TA:  J Orthop Surg Res     Country:  -    
Other Details:
Languages:  ENG     Pagination:  19     Citation Subset:  -    
Export Citation:
APA/MLA Format     Download EndNote     Download BibTex
MeSH Terms
Descriptor/Qualifier:

From MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine

Full Text
Journal Information
Journal ID (nlm-ta): J Orthop Surg Res
Journal ID (iso-abbrev): J Orthop Surg Res
ISSN: 1749-799X
Publisher: BioMed Central
Article Information
Download PDF
Copyright © 2014 Ran et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.
open-access:
Received Day: 24 Month: 12 Year: 2013
Accepted Day: 24 Month: 2 Year: 2014
collection publication date: Year: 2014
Electronic publication date: Day: 17 Month: 3 Year: 2014
Volume: 9First Page: 19 Last Page: 19
PubMed Id: 24635839
ID: 4012511
Publisher Id: 1749-799X-9-19
DOI: 10.1186/1749-799X-9-19

Comparison of the sagittal profiles among thoracic idiopathic scoliosis patients with different Cobb angles and growth potentials
Bo Ran1 Email: ranbobobobo@hotmail.com
Guo-you Zhang2 Email: zhguoyouxz@163.com
Feng Shen2 Email: shenfeng433@163.com
Jia-yu Chen3 Email: chenjiayuorth@163.com
Ji-bin Wu1 Email: wjbdoo@163.com
Feng-chao Zhao1 Email: zhaofchao@126.com
Kai-jin Guo1 Email: guokaijin@yeah.net
Dun-yi Qi4 Email: qidunyi@126.com
Bing Zhou1 Email: zhoubing006@yeah.net
Xiang-yang Chen1 Email: pengpinwei@hotmail.com
Xin-zhu Zhang1 Email: zhangxzhu@126.com
Yue-hua Qiao56 Email: ranbobobobo@hotmail.com
Ming Li2 Email: liming006@yeah.net
1Department of Orthopedics, The Affiliated Hospital of Xuzhou Medical College, No. 99 Huaihai road, Xuzhou, Jiangsu 221006, China
2Department of Orthopedics, Changhai Hospital Affiliated to Second Military Medical University, Shanghai 200433, China
3Department of Orthopedics, Kunming General Hospital of Chengdu Military Command, Kunming 650032, China
4Department of Anesthesiology, The Affiliated Hospital of Xuzhou Medical College, No. 99 Huaihai road, Xuzhou, Jiangsu 221006, China
5Department of Otolaryngology, The Affiliated Hospital of Xuzhou Medical College, No. 99 Huaihai road, Xuzhou, Jiangsu 221006, China
6Institute of Audiology and Speech Science, The Affiliated Hospital of Xuzhou Medical College, Xuzhou, Jiangsu 221006, China

Introduction

Idiopathic scoliosis is the most common spinal deformity in human, affecting more than 2% of the adolescent population and resulting in more than 600, 000 physician visits annually [1]. Recent studies have discovered several risk factors associated with progression to a severe curve, including the delayed age of first menstruation [2], lower bone age [3], high Cobb’s angle at presentation [4], and decreased bone density [5]. In addition, some scholars report that there is a consistent loss of kyphosis in thoracic scoliosis patients compared with normal control or patients with thoracolumbar curves [6,7] and scoliosis progresses faster in patients with minor thoracic kyphosis [8]. Pelvic incidence and sacral slope are also shown to be significantly greater in idiopathic scoliosis patients compared with normal adolescents [7]. However, whether these sagittal parameters are related to the progression of scoliosis remain unknown. In this study, we aimed to compare the sagittal profiles among the thoracic idiopathic scoliosis patients with three different progression potentials.


Methods
Patients

A total of 97 right thoracic curve idiopathic scoliosis patients were admitted to our hospital from June 2008 to June 2011. No treatment was adopted before the visit to interfere the nature history of the scoliosis progression in all 97 enrolled patients. All human studies have been approved by the hospital ethics committee and performed in accordance with the ethical standards. Written informed consent was obtained from all the participants or their parents.

All of these 97 patients underwent clinical and radiological examinations by expert spinal surgeons and were divided to three groups according to the different progression potentials: (1) non-progression of thoracic curve group, Risser sign of 5 and Cobb’s angle < 40°; (2) moderate progression of thoracic curve group, Risser sign of 5 and Cobb’s angle ≥ 40°; and (3) severe progression of thoracic curve group, Risser sign ≤ 3 and Cobb’s angle ≥ 40° [9].

Imaging measurement index

All of these 97 patients underwent whole spinal anteroposterior and lateral X-ray in standing position. The X-ray imaging was inputted into the computer and digitally analyzed with image-pro plus 6.0 software [10] to obtain the following sagittal parameters: (1) thoracic kyphosis, the Cobb’s angle between the cranial superior endplate of T5 and the caudal inferior endplate of T12 (positive values are defined as kyphosis, while negative values are defined as lordosis); (2) lumbar lordosis, the Cobb’s angle between the cranial superior endplate of L1 and the caudal superior endplate of S1 (positive values are defined as lordosis, while negative values are defined as kyphosis); (3) sacral slope, the angle between the upper end plate of S1 and the horizontal line; (4) pelvic incidence, defined as the angle between the perpendicular of the upper endplate of S1 and the line joining the middle of the upper endplate of S1 and the hip axis (midway between the centers of the two femoral heads); and (5) pelvic tilt, the angle between the vertical line and the line joining the middle of the upper endplate of S1 and the hip axis (positive when the hip axis lies in front of the middle of the upper endplate of S1). None of the patients underwent treatment during study.

Statistical analysis

All data were analyzed by SPSS 13.0 software package (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, USA) and expressed as mean ± standard deviation (SD). The difference between three groups was analyzed by one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA). P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.


Results
General data

The general characteristics of these three groups are shown in Table 1. Thirty-one patients were assigned into the non-progression group, in which 29 patients were female and 2 patients were male; the average age was 17.9 years old (14–24 years old), and the average thoracic Cobb’s angle was 30° ± 6°. Thirty-four patients belonged to the moderate progression group, in which 32 patients were female and 2 patients were male, the average age was 18.7 years old (16–25 years old), and the average thoracic Cobb’s angle was 50° ± 8°. Thirty-two patients were categorized into the severe progression group, in which 29 patients were female and 3 patients were male, the average age was 13.8 years old (11–16 years old), and the average thoracic Cobb’s angle was 51° ± 7°. There was no statistical difference among these patients in sex ratio. But there were significant differences in average age, average thoracic Cobb’s angle, and average Risser sign among the three groups. The average age in the severe progression group was significantly less than that in the non-progression group (P < 0.01) and the moderate progression group (P < 0.01), while there was no statistical difference in the average age between the non-progression group and the moderate progression group (P = 0.761). The average thoracic Cobb’s angle in the non-progression group was significantly smaller than that in the moderate progression group (P < 0.01) and the severe progression group (P < 0.01), but no statistical difference in the average thoracic Cobb’s angle was observed between the severe progression group and the moderate progression group (P = 0.622). The Risser sign of the non-progression group and the moderate progression group was 5°. But the average Risser sign of the severe progression group was 1.8 which was significantly less than that in the moderate progression group (P < 0.01) and the non-progression group (P < 0.01).

The typical cases in each group are shown in Figures 1,2,3.

Comparison of the sagittal parameters

The sagittal parameters of these three groups are displayed in Table 2. The average thoracic kyphosis angle was 18° ± 6°, 14° ± 5°, and 9° ± 4° in the non-progression group, moderate progression group, and the severe progression group, respectively. Statistical analysis indicated that the average thoracic kyphosis angle in the severe progression group was significantly smaller than that in the non-progression group (P < 0.01) and moderate progression group (P < 0.05). The average thoracic kyphosis angle in the moderate progression group was also significantly smaller than that in the non-progression group (P < 0.01). No statistical differences were present in the average lumbar lordosis, sacral slope, pelvic incidence, and pelvic tilt between the above three groups (P > 0.05).


Discussion

It is reported that idiopathic scoliosis deformity progresses until skeletal maturity. Skeletal maturity was defined as the Risser sign of 4 or 5 [4]. In addition, the scoliosis of a Cobb angle greater than 40° has been reported to have 70% progression rate after skeletal maturity, whereas those less than 30° have little progression [11]. Thus, in this study, we defined the curve progression according to the Risser sign and Cobb angle [9]. The grouping method in our study may reflect truly the three different scoliosis progressions. The Risser sign of the non-progression patients and the moderate progression patients reached to 5 in our study, indicating the growth potential is very small and the scoliosis progression tends towards stability. But the average Cobb’s angle of the moderate progression patients was greater obviously than that of the non-progression patients, so the scoliosis progression in the moderate progression patients was greater than that in the non-progression patients. The average Cobb’s angle of the moderate progression patients was the same as that of the severe progression patients, but the Risser sign of the severe progression patients was below 3 (the average Risser sign was only 1.8), so the growth potential of the severe progression patients was great and the scoliosis progression continued. Thus, the scoliosis progression in the severe progression patients was still greater than that in the moderate progression patients.

Although the etiology is complex, progressive adolescent idiopathic scoliosis is generally attributed to relative anterior spinal overgrowth from a mechanical mechanism during the adolescent growth spurt, which leads to thoracic hypokyphosis followed by increasing axial rotational instability [12,13]. This theory is further confirmed by some clinic studies. For example, Rigo et al. found that the patients with more severe thoracic curves had smaller thoracic kyphotic angles [14]. Ylikoski reported the sagittal profiles of 535 adolescent idiopathic scoliosis patients and found that the mean progression velocity of major curves was 2.8° every year in the patients with minor thoracic kyphosis, while 1.8° every year in the patients with greater thoracic kyphosis [8]. Our results were also consistent with the above observation, showing that the average thoracic kyphosis angle in the severe progression group was significantly smaller than that in the non-progression group and the moderate progression group significantly.

Interestingly, thoracic hypokyphosis is only observed in the thoracic scoliosis patients, and there is no significant difference in the thoracic kyphosis between the lumbar scoliosis patients and normal people [7]. These suggest that the pathogenesis of the thoracic idiopathic scoliosis patients may be different from that in the lumbar idiopathic scoliosis patients, and the relationship between the thoracic hypokyphosis and the scoliosis progression seems to be more evident in the thoracic idiopathic scoliosis. Thus, only the thoracic idiopathic scoliosis patients were selected as the study objects, which make our analysis more scientific and targeted. In addition, the included patients had no history of any treatments before, which can prevent the scoliosis’ natural progression from disturbance.

Other than thoracic kyphosis, we also evaluated the relationship between other sagittal parameters and scoliosis progression, including lumbar lordosis, sacral slope, the pelvic incidence, and the pelvic tilt. Pelvic incidence and pelvic tilt are describing pelvic rotation around the center of femoral head (hip axis). This rotation represents a pelvic compensatory mechanism in response to the change in the spinal alignment. Some scholars found that the pelvic incidence in the idiopathic scoliosis patients was greater than the normal people, so they thought that an increase in pelvic incidence was one of the scoliosis progressive factors [7]. Some papers reported that pelvic incidence had a strong correlation with lumbar scoliosis at sagittal plane in both scoliosis patients and normal subjects [15,16], which indirectly demonstrates that lumbar scoliosis may have an effect on the sagittal balance. However, in our study, there was no statistical difference about the sacral slope, pelvic incidence, and pelvic tilt angle between the above three groups, indicating that there may be no relationship between the pelvic profile and the thoracic progression.


Conclusion

The results of this study support that thoracic hypokyphosis is strongly related with the curve progression in thoracic idiopathic scoliosis patients, but not pelvic sagittal profiles.


Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.


Authors’ contributions

BR, GYZ, and FS participated in the design of this study and performed the statistical analysis. JYC, JBW, and FCZ carried out the study, together with KJG, collected important background information, and drafted the manuscript. DYQ, BZ, XYC, XZZ, YHQ, JHG and ML conceived of this study and participated in the design and helped to draft the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.


Authors’ information

Bo Ran is the first author,Guoyou Zhang and Feng Shen are co-first authors Xiangyang Chen is the corresponding author, Junhui Guan and Kaijin Guo are co-corresponding authors.


References
Ogilvie J,Adolescent idiopathic scoliosis and genetic testingCurr Opin PediatrYear: 20109677010.1097/MOP.0b013e32833419ac19949338
S-h M,Jiang J,Sun X,Zhao Q,Qian B-p,Liu Z,Shu H,Qiu Y,Timing of menarche in Chinese girls with and without adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: current results and review of the literatureEur Spine JYear: 2011926026510.1007/s00586-010-1649-621153847
Dolan L,Masrouha K,El-Khoury G,Weinstein S,The reliability and prognostic implications of a simplified bone age classification system for adolescent idiopathic scoliosisScoliosisYear: 20129O1410.1186/1748-7161-7-S1-O14
Lee C,Fong DY,Cheung K,Cheng JC,Ng BK,Lam T,Yip PS,Luk KD,A new risk classification rule for curve progression in adolescent idiopathic scoliosisSpine JYear: 2012998999510.1016/j.spinee.2012.05.00922727318
Dede O,Akel I,Demirkiran G,Yalcin N,Marcucio R,Acaroglu E,Is decreased bone mineral density associated with development of scoliosis? A bipedal osteopenic rat modelScoliosisYear: 201192410.1186/1748-7161-6-2422040734
Hayashi K,Upasani VV,Pawelek JB,Aubin C-É,Labelle H,Lenke LG,Jackson R,Newton PO,Three-dimensional analysis of thoracic apical sagittal alignment in adolescent idiopathic scoliosisSpineYear: 2009979279710.1097/BRS.0b013e31818e2c3619365246
Upasani VV,Tis J,Bastrom T,Pawelek J,Marks M,Lonner B,Crawford A,Newton PO,Analysis of sagittal alignment in thoracic and thoracolumbar curves in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: how do these two curve types differ?SpineYear: 200791355135910.1097/BRS.0b013e318059321d17515826
Ylikoski M,Growth and progression of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis in girlsJ Pediatr Orthop BYear: 2005932032410.1097/01202412-200509000-0000216093941
Ogura Y,Takahashi Y,Kou I,Nakajima M,Kono K,Kawakami N,Uno K,Ito M,Minami S,Yanagida H,A replication study for association of 5 single nucleotide polymorphisms with curve progression of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis in Japanese patientsSpineYear: 2013957157510.1097/BRS.0b013e318276153523038618
Kuklo TR,Potter BK,Schroeder TM,O’Brien MF,Comparison of manual and digital measurements in adolescent idiopathic scoliosisSpineYear: 200691240124610.1097/01.brs.0000217774.13433.a716688038
Weinstein SL,Natural historySpineYear: 19999259210.1097/00007632-199912150-0000610635522
Guo X,Chau W-W,Chan Y-L,Cheng J-Y,Relative anterior spinal overgrowth in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Results of disproportionate endochondral-membranous bone growthJ Bone Joint Surg BrYear: 200391026103110.1302/0301-620X.85B7.1404614516040
Burwell R,Aetiology of idiopathic scoliosis: current conceptsDev NeurorehabilYear: 2003913717010.1080/13638490310001642757
Rigo M,Quera-Salvá G,Villagrasa M,Sagittal configuration of the spine in girls with idiopathic scoliosis: progressing rather than initiating factorStud Health Technol InformYear: 200699017108409
Legaye J,Duval-Beaupere G,Hecquet J,Marty C,Pelvic incidence: a fundamental pelvic parameter for three-dimensional regulation of spinal sagittal curvesEur Spine JYear: 199899910310.1007/s0058600500389629932
Mac-Thiong J-M,Labelle H,Charlebois M,Huot M-P,de Guise JA,Sagittal plane analysis of the spine and pelvis in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis according to the coronal curve typeSpineYear: 200391404140912838098

Figures

[Figure ID: F1]
Figure 1 

An 18-year-old female thoracic idiopathic scoliosis patient. Risser sign was 5. The thoracic scoliosis Cobb’s angle was 30°, and the thoracic kyphosis Cobb’s angle was 28°. (A) The whole spinal anteroposterior in standing position. (B) Lateral X-ray in standing position.



[Figure ID: F2]
Figure 2 

A 16-year-old female thoracic idiopathic scoliosis patient. Risser sign was 5. The thoracic scoliosis Cobb’s angle was 42°, and the thoracic kyphosis Cobb’s angle was 15°. (A) The whole spinal anteroposterior in standing position. (B) Lateral X-ray in standing position.



[Figure ID: F3]
Figure 3 

A 15-year-old female thoracic idiopathic scoliosis patient. Risser sign was 3. The thoracic scoliosis Cobb’s angle was 50°, and the thoracic kyphosis Cobb’s angle was 7°. (A) The whole spinal anteroposterior in standing position. (B) Lateral X-ray in standing position.



Tables
[TableWrap ID: T1] Table 1 

General data of idiopathic scoliosis patients with non-progression, moderate progression, and severe progression of thoracic curve


Group Cases Age (years) Gender (male/female) Thoracic Cobb’s (°) Risser sign
Non-progression
31
17.9 ± 2.1
2/29
30 ± 6ab
5
Moderate progression
34
18.7 ± 2.4
2/32
50 ± 8
5
Severe progression 32 13.8 ± 1.3a 2/29 51 ± 7 0–3 (average 1.8)a

aP < 0.01, compared to the moderate progression group; bP < 0.01, compared to the severe progression group.


[TableWrap ID: T2] Table 2 

Sagittal parameters of idiopathic scoliosis patients with non-progression, moderate progression, and severe progression of thoracic curve (°, X ± S)


Group Thoracic kyphosis angle Lumbar lordosis Cobb’s angle Sacral slope Cobb’s angle Pelvic incidence Cobb’s angle Pelvic tilt angle
Non-progression
18 ± 6
51 ± 7
35 ± 6
42 ± 9
8 ± 6
Moderate progression
14 ± 5a
46 ± 9
36 ± 7
45 ± 11
9 ± 7
Severe progression 9 ± 4ab 50 ± 8 38 ± 6 46 ± 9 8 ± 7

aP < 0.01, compared to the non-progression group; bP < 0.05, compared to the moderate progression group.



Article Categories:
  • Research Article

Keywords: Sagittal profiles, Idiopathic scoliosis, Thoracic kyphosis, Lumbar lordosis.

Previous Document:  Nanoparticle Cluster Gas Sensor: Controlled Clustering of SnO2 Nanoparticles for Highly Sensitive To...
Next Document:  Does Semantic Memory Impairment in Amnestic MCI with Hippocampal Atrophy Conform to a Distinctive Pa...