Cargando…

Comparison of the sagittal profiles among thoracic idiopathic scoliosis patients with different Cobb angles and growth potentials

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 de...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Ran, Bo, Zhang, Guo-you, Shen, Feng, Chen, Jia-yu, Wu, Ji-bin, Zhao, Feng-chao, Guo, Kai-jin, Qi, Dun-yi, Zhou, Bing, Chen, Xiang-yang, Zhang, Xin-zhu, Qiao, Yue-hua, Li, Ming
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4012511/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24635839
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1749-799X-9-19
_version_ 1782314941067296768
author Ran, Bo
Zhang, Guo-you
Shen, Feng
Chen, Jia-yu
Wu, Ji-bin
Zhao, Feng-chao
Guo, Kai-jin
Qi, Dun-yi
Zhou, Bing
Chen, Xiang-yang
Zhang, Xin-zhu
Qiao, Yue-hua
Li, Ming
author_facet Ran, Bo
Zhang, Guo-you
Shen, Feng
Chen, Jia-yu
Wu, Ji-bin
Zhao, Feng-chao
Guo, Kai-jin
Qi, Dun-yi
Zhou, Bing
Chen, Xiang-yang
Zhang, Xin-zhu
Qiao, Yue-hua
Li, Ming
author_sort Ran, Bo
collection PubMed
description 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°; (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°. 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° ± 4°) was significantly smaller than that in the non-progression group (18° ± 6°, P < 0.01) and moderate progression group (14° ± 5°, 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.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4012511
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2014
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-40125112014-05-08 Comparison of the sagittal profiles among thoracic idiopathic scoliosis patients with different Cobb angles and growth potentials Ran, Bo Zhang, Guo-you Shen, Feng Chen, Jia-yu Wu, Ji-bin Zhao, Feng-chao Guo, Kai-jin Qi, Dun-yi Zhou, Bing Chen, Xiang-yang Zhang, Xin-zhu Qiao, Yue-hua Li, Ming J Orthop Surg Res Research Article 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°; (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°. 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° ± 4°) was significantly smaller than that in the non-progression group (18° ± 6°, P < 0.01) and moderate progression group (14° ± 5°, 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. BioMed Central 2014-03-17 /pmc/articles/PMC4012511/ /pubmed/24635839 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1749-799X-9-19 Text en Copyright © 2014 Ran et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0 This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
Ran, Bo
Zhang, Guo-you
Shen, Feng
Chen, Jia-yu
Wu, Ji-bin
Zhao, Feng-chao
Guo, Kai-jin
Qi, Dun-yi
Zhou, Bing
Chen, Xiang-yang
Zhang, Xin-zhu
Qiao, Yue-hua
Li, Ming
Comparison of the sagittal profiles among thoracic idiopathic scoliosis patients with different Cobb angles and growth potentials
title Comparison of the sagittal profiles among thoracic idiopathic scoliosis patients with different Cobb angles and growth potentials
title_full Comparison of the sagittal profiles among thoracic idiopathic scoliosis patients with different Cobb angles and growth potentials
title_fullStr Comparison of the sagittal profiles among thoracic idiopathic scoliosis patients with different Cobb angles and growth potentials
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of the sagittal profiles among thoracic idiopathic scoliosis patients with different Cobb angles and growth potentials
title_short Comparison of the sagittal profiles among thoracic idiopathic scoliosis patients with different Cobb angles and growth potentials
title_sort comparison of the sagittal profiles among thoracic idiopathic scoliosis patients with different cobb angles and growth potentials
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4012511/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24635839
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1749-799X-9-19
work_keys_str_mv AT ranbo comparisonofthesagittalprofilesamongthoracicidiopathicscoliosispatientswithdifferentcobbanglesandgrowthpotentials
AT zhangguoyou comparisonofthesagittalprofilesamongthoracicidiopathicscoliosispatientswithdifferentcobbanglesandgrowthpotentials
AT shenfeng comparisonofthesagittalprofilesamongthoracicidiopathicscoliosispatientswithdifferentcobbanglesandgrowthpotentials
AT chenjiayu comparisonofthesagittalprofilesamongthoracicidiopathicscoliosispatientswithdifferentcobbanglesandgrowthpotentials
AT wujibin comparisonofthesagittalprofilesamongthoracicidiopathicscoliosispatientswithdifferentcobbanglesandgrowthpotentials
AT zhaofengchao comparisonofthesagittalprofilesamongthoracicidiopathicscoliosispatientswithdifferentcobbanglesandgrowthpotentials
AT guokaijin comparisonofthesagittalprofilesamongthoracicidiopathicscoliosispatientswithdifferentcobbanglesandgrowthpotentials
AT qidunyi comparisonofthesagittalprofilesamongthoracicidiopathicscoliosispatientswithdifferentcobbanglesandgrowthpotentials
AT zhoubing comparisonofthesagittalprofilesamongthoracicidiopathicscoliosispatientswithdifferentcobbanglesandgrowthpotentials
AT chenxiangyang comparisonofthesagittalprofilesamongthoracicidiopathicscoliosispatientswithdifferentcobbanglesandgrowthpotentials
AT zhangxinzhu comparisonofthesagittalprofilesamongthoracicidiopathicscoliosispatientswithdifferentcobbanglesandgrowthpotentials
AT qiaoyuehua comparisonofthesagittalprofilesamongthoracicidiopathicscoliosispatientswithdifferentcobbanglesandgrowthpotentials
AT liming comparisonofthesagittalprofilesamongthoracicidiopathicscoliosispatientswithdifferentcobbanglesandgrowthpotentials