Literature DB >> 26356067

Prediction of Curve Progression in Idiopathic Scoliosis: Validation of the Sanders Skeletal Maturity Staging System.

Prakash Sitoula1, Kushagra Verma, Laurens Holmes, Peter G Gabos, James O Sanders, Petya Yorgova, Geraldine Neiss, Kenneth Rogers, Suken A Shah.   

Abstract

STUDY
DESIGN: Retrospective case series.
OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to validate the Sanders Skeletal Maturity Staging System and to assess its correlation to curve progression in idiopathic scoliosis. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: The Sanders Skeletal Maturity Staging System has been used to predict curve progression in idiopathic scoliosis. This study intended to validate that initial study with a larger sample size.
METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed 1100 consecutive patients with idiopathic scoliosis between 2005 and 2011. Girls aged 8 to 14 years (<2 yr postmenarche) and boys aged 10 to 16 years who had obtained at least 1 hand and spine radiograph on the same day for evaluation of skeletal age and scoliosis curve magnitude were followed to skeletal maturity (Risser stage 5 or fully capped Risser stage 4), curve progression to 50° or greater, or spinal fusion. Patients with nonidiopathic curves were excluded.
RESULTS: There were 161 patients: 131 girls (12.3 ± 1.2 yr) and 30 boys (13.9 ± 1.1 yr). The distribution of patients within Sanders stage (SS) 1 through 7 was 7, 28, 41, 45, 7, 31, and 2 patients, respectively; modified Lenke curve types 1 to 6 were 26, 12, 63, 5, 38, and 17 patients, respectively. All patients in SS2 with initial Cobb angles of 25° or greater progressed, and patients in SS1 and SS3 with initial Cobb angles of 35° or greater progressed. Similarly, all patients with initial Cobb angles of 40° or greater progressed except those in SS7. Conversely, none of the patients with initial Cobb angles of 15° or less or those in SS5, SS6, and SS7 with initial Cobb angles of 30° or less progressed. Predictive progression of 67%, 50%, 43%, 27%, and 60% was observed for subgroups SS1/30°, SS2/20°, SS3/30°, SS4/30°, and SS6/35° respectively.
CONCLUSION: This larger cohort shows a strong predictive correlation between SS and initial Cobb angle for probability of curve progression in idiopathic scoliosis. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26356067     DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000000952

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)        ISSN: 0362-2436            Impact factor:   3.468


  20 in total

1.  When Should We Wean Bracing for Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis?

Authors:  Jason Pui Yin Cheung; Prudence Wing Hang Cheung; Keith Dip-Kei Luk
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2019-09       Impact factor: 4.176

Review 2.  The impact of residual growth on deformity progression.

Authors:  Ismat Ghanem; Maroun Rizkallah
Journal:  Ann Transl Med       Date:  2020-01

3.  Evaluation of Predictors and Outcomes of Bracing with Emphasis on the Immediate Effects of in-Brace Correction in Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis.

Authors:  Tzu Chuan Yen; Stuart L Weinstein
Journal:  Iowa Orthop J       Date:  2019

4.  Bracing in Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis Trial (BrAIST): Development and Validation of a Prognostic Model in Untreated Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis Using the Simplified Skeletal Maturity System.

Authors:  Lori A Dolan; Stuart L Weinstein; Mark F Abel; Patrick P Bosch; Matthew B Dobbs; Tyler O Farber; Matthew F Halsey; M Timothy Hresko; Walter F Krengel; Charles T Mehlman; James O Sanders; Richard M Schwend; Suken A Shah; Kushagra Verma
Journal:  Spine Deform       Date:  2019-11

Review 5.  Scoliosis and Prognosis-a systematic review regarding patient-specific and radiological predictive factors for curve progression.

Authors:  Maximilian Lenz; Stavros Oikonomidis; Arne Harland; Philipp Fürnstahl; Mazda Farshad; Jan Bredow; Peer Eysel; Max Joseph Scheyerer
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2021-03-26       Impact factor: 3.134

Review 6.  [Classification of the growth potential and consecutive treatment consequences for spinal deformities : When does what make sense?]

Authors:  M Thielen; M Akbar
Journal:  Orthopade       Date:  2019-06       Impact factor: 1.087

7.  Curve Progression in Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis Does Not Match Skeletal Growth.

Authors:  Jason Pui Yin Cheung; Prudence Wing Hang Cheung; Dino Samartzis; Keith Dip-Kei Luk
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2018-02       Impact factor: 4.176

8.  A Simplified Skeletal Maturity Scale and Thumb Ossification Composite Index to Assess Skeletal Maturity and Predict Height Velocity in Japanese Females with Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis.

Authors:  Masaaki Chazono; Shintaro Obata
Journal:  Spine Surg Relat Res       Date:  2021-01-12

9.  Cervical vertebral maturation (CVM) stage as a supplementary indicator for the assessment of peak height velocity (PHV) in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS).

Authors:  Yuancheng Zhang; Shibin Shu; Qi Gu; Zhen Liu; Zezhang Zhu; Yong Qiu; Hongda Bao
Journal:  Quant Imaging Med Surg       Date:  2020-01

10.  Does the Use of Sanders Staging and Distal Radius and Ulna Classification Avoid Mismatches in Growth Assessment with Risser Staging Alone?

Authors:  Prudence Wing Hang Cheung; Jason Pui Yin Cheung
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2021-11-01       Impact factor: 4.755

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.