Search

Study Design Retrospective Cohort Study Objectives Mid-term Anterior Vertebral Body Tethering (AVBT) results demonstrate an acceptable degree of clinical success, yet the revision rate remains notably higher than fusion. Fulcrum-bending radiographs have previously been shown to more reliably predict radiological outcomes in Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis (AIS) as compared to supine-lateral bending radiographs. This study aims to discern how Fulcrum Flexibility Rate (FFR) correlates with Correction Rate (CR) and establish whether this can reliably predict residual deformity following AVBT surgery. Methods A review of 38 consecutive AIS patients undergoing thoracic AVBT between 2015 – 2020 was performed. Preoperative (standing and fulcrum-bending) and postoperative (first-erect) radiographs were evaluated for curve magnitude using the Cobb-method. The FFR, CR and Fulcrum Bending Correction Index (FBCI) were calculated. Patients were also percentile-ranked according to their FFR and dichotomized into flexible and rigid cohorts for comparison. Student t-test, Pearson correlation and linear stepwise regression was applied. Results: AVBT resulted in a significant improvement in the major Cobb angle (Preoperative: 50.9±7.5° vs Postoperative: 19.9±9.4°; P < .0001) with a mean FBCI of 98.0%. Bivariate correlation revealed a moderate relationship between fulcrum-bending and first-erect Cobb angle (r = .5306, P = .0006). Linear regression demonstrated a predictive relationship between fulcrum-bending and first-erect Cobb using the equation ‘Postoperative Cobb = 7.5 + .65(Fulcrum-bending Cobb).’ Conclusion: This is the first study to demonstrate the ability of fulcrum-bending radiographs to predict early radiographic outcomes following AVBT, ‘timepoint-zero’ for the growth modulation process.

Study Design: This was a single-center retrospective review. Objectives: To explore how age and gender affect PROMIS scores compared with traditional health-related quality of life (HRQL) in spine patients. Methods: Patients presenting with a primary complaint of back pain (BP) or neck pain (NP) were included. Legacy HRQLs were Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Neck Disability Index (NDI), and Visual Analogue Scale (VAS). PROMIS Physical Function (PF), Pain Intensity (Int), and Pain Interference (Inf) were also administered to patients in a clinical setting. Patients were grouped by chief complaint, age (18-44, 45-64, 65+ years) and gender. Two parallel analyses were conducted to identify the effects of age and gender on patient-reported outcomes. Age groups were compared after propensity-score matching by VAS-pain and gender. Separately, genders were compared after propensity-score matching by age and VAS-pain. Results: A total of 484 BP and 128 NP patients were matched into gender cohorts (n = 201 in each BP group, 46 in each NP group). Among BP patients, female patients demonstrated worse disability by ODI (44.15 vs 38.45, P = .005); PROMIS-PF did not differ by gender. Among NP patients, neither legacy HRQLs nor PROMIS differed by gender when controlling for NP and age. BP and NP patients were matched into age cohorts (n = 135 in each BP group and n = 14 in each BP group). Among BP patients, ANOVA revealed differences between groups when controlling for BP and gender: ODI ( P < .001), PROMIS-PF ( P = .018), PROMIS-Int ( P < .001) PROMIS-Inf ( P < .001). Among NP patients, matched age groups differed significantly in terms of NDI ( P = .032) and PROMIS-PF ( P = .022) but not PROMIS-Int or PROMIS-Inf. Conclusions: Age and gender confound traditional HRQLs as well as PROMIS domains. However, PROMIS offers age and gender-specific scores, which traditional HRQLs lack.