EFFECTIVENESS OF PATIENT-SPECIFIC THORACOLUMBAR BRACE TREATMENT FOR ADOLESCENT IDIOPATHIC SCOLIOSIS: A PROSPECTIVE COHORT STUDY

Objective: The efficacy of bracing for patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) remains controversial. We aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of patient-specific thoracolumbar brace treatment in patients with AIS who met the Scoliosis Research Society inclusion criteria and the factors affecting success rate. Materials and Methods: From April 2015 to February 2018, 25 patients diagnosed with AIS treated with patient-specific thoracolumbar brace were asked to participate in this study. The initial brace correction rate and clinical outcomes of the main curvature was evaluated. The clinical course of bracing was considered progression if there was ≥6° curvature increase and improvement if there was ≥6° curvature decrease. The success rate was correlated with age, sex, Lenke classification, Risser grade, initial Cobb angle and rotation grade. Results: The curvature progressed and improved in 13 and two cases, respectively, and the curve remained unchanged in 10 cases. A success rate of 48% (12/25) was achieved. Moreover, only three of 25 cases with Cobb angle of 45° were considered candidates for surgery. The mean prebrace Cobb angle of the main curvature was 27.9°±6.7°, which ranged from 20° to 37°. The duration of bracing was 37.2 (6-76) months. The mean Cobb angle at the end of the treatment was 32.1°±8.2°, which ranged from 15° to 45°. No correlation was found between age, Risser grade and brace treatment success. However, treatment success was significantly correlated with initial Cobb angle, rotation grade and Lenke classification (main thoracic) (p

Kaynakça

1. Weiss HR, Goodall D. The treatment of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) according to present evidence. A systematic review. Eur J Phys Rehabil Med. 2008;44:177-93.

2. Sy Ng, Bettany-Saltikov J, Moramarco M. Evidence for conservative treatment of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis - Update 2015 (MiniReview). Curr Pediatr Rev. 2016;12:6-11.

3. Negrini S, Minozzi S, Bettany-Saltikov J, Zaina F, Chockalingam N, Grivas TB, et al. Braces for idiopathic scoliosis in adolescents. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010;1:CD006850.

4. Silva FE, Lenke LG. Adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. In: Errico TJ, Lonner BS, Moulton AW, eds. Surgical Management of Spinal Deformities. Philadelphia, Pa:Saunders Elsevier; 2009:97-118.

5. Fang MQ, Wang C, Xiang GH, Lou C, Tian NF, Xu HZ. Long-term effects of the Ch êneau brace on coronal and sagittal alignment in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. J Neurosurg Spine. 2015;23:505-9.

6. Landauer F, Wimmer C, Behensky H. Estimating the final outcome of brace treatment for idiopathic thoracic scoliosis at 6-month followup. Pediatr Rehabil. 2003;6:201-7.

7. Guo J, Lam TP, Wong MS, Wah Ng BK, Lee KM, Liu KL, et al. A prospective randomized controlled study on the treatment outcome of SpineCor brace versus rigid brace for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis with follow-up according to the SRS standardized criteria. Eur Spine J. 2014;23:2650-7.

8. De Giorgi S, Piazzolla A, Tafuri S, Borracci C, Martucci A, De Giorgi G. Chêneau brace for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: long-term results. Can it prevent surgery? Eur Spine J. 2013;22(Suppl6):S815-22.

9. Richards BS, Bernstein RM, D’Amato CR, Thompson GH. Standardization of criteria for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis brace studies: SRS Committee on Bracing and Nonoperative Management. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2005;30:2068-75.

10. Nash CL, Moe JH. A study of vertebral rotation. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1969;51:223-9.

11. Thompson RM, Hubbard EW, Jo CH, Virostek D, Karol LA. Brace success is related to curve type in patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2017;99:923-8.

12. Lonstein JE, Carlson JM. The prediction of curve progression in untreated idiopathic scoliosis during growth. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1984;66:1061-71.

13. Cheung JPY, Cheung PWH, Yeng WC, Chan LCK. Does curve regression occur during underarm bracing in patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis? Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2020;478:334-45.

14. Yrjönen T, Ylikoski M, Schlenzka D, Poussa M. Results of brace treatment of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis in boys compared with girls: a retrospective study of 102 patients treated with the Boston brace. Eur Spine J. 2007;16:393-7.

15. Peltonen J, Poussa M, Ylikoski M. Three-year results of bracing in scoliosis. Acta Orthop Scand. 1988;59:487-90.

16. Emans J, Kaelin A, Bancel P, Hall J, Miller M. The Boston bracing system for idiopathic scoliosis: follow-up results in 295 patients. Spine. 1986;11:792–801.

17. Katz D, Durrani A. Factors that influence outcome in bracing large curves in patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2001;26:2354-61.

18. Ovadia D, Eylon S, Mashiah A, Wientroub S, Lebel E. Factors associated with the success of the Rigo System Cheneau brace in treating mild to moderate adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. J Child Orthop. 2012;6:327-31.

19. Kuroki H, Inomate N, Hamanaka H, Higa K, Chosa E, Tajima N. Predictive factors of Osaka Medical College (OMC) brace treatment in patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Scoliosis. 2015;10:11.

20. Van Den Bogaart M, Van Royen B, Haanstra T, De Kleuver M, Faraj S. Predictive factors for brace treatment outcome in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: a best-evidence synthesis. Eur Spine J. 2019;28:511-25.

Kaynak Göster

  • ISSN: 2147-5903
  • Yayın Aralığı: Yılda 4 Sayı
  • Başlangıç: 1989
  • Yayıncı: Galenos Yayınevi

2.9b 2.2b

Sayıdaki Diğer Makaleler

DYNAMIC INSTRUMENTATION OF THE THORACIC SPINE

Ahmet ÖĞRENCİ, Ezgi AKAR, Orkun KOBAN, Onur YAMAN, Mesut YILMAZ, Sedat DALBAYRAK

DOES LUMBOSACRAL TRANSITIONAL VERTEBRAE CAUSE LOW BACK PAIN?

Gökhan Kürşat KARA, Hüseyin KAVAK

COMPLEX REGIONAL PAIN SYNDROME FOLLOWING SPINAL DISEASES AND SURGERIES

Burcu CANDAN

THE EFFICACY OF SURGICAL TECHNIQUES FOR CERVICAL SPONDYLOTIC MYELOPATHY ON FUNCTIONAL OUTCOME, RECOVERY AND PATIENT SATISFACTION

Halil SÜNER, Emre DURDAĞ, Soner ÇİVİ, Özgür KARDEŞ, Aylin YETİŞKEN GÜNEŞLİ, Kadir TUFAN, Metin ÖZALAY

THE IMPORTANCE OF SUBCUTANEOUS TISSUE THICKNESS FOR THE OCCURRENCE OF SURGICAL SITE INFECTION AFTER LUMBAR DISC SURGERY

İlker GÜLEÇ, Feyza Karagöz GÜZEY

ADJACENT SEGMENT DEGENERATION AFTER DECOMPRESSION AND FUSION SURGERY FOR DEGENERATIVE LUMBAR SPINAL STENOSIS: A RETROSPECTIVE COMPARATIVE EVALUATION

Evren KARAALİ, Fırat SEYFETTİNOĞLU

A SURGICAL ERROR RESULTING IN PROXIMAL JUNCTIONAL KYPHOSIS IN TREATMENT OF ADOLESCENT IDIOPATHIC SCOLIOSIS

Serkan BAYRAM, Şahin KARALAR, Caner GÜNERBÜYÜK, Murat ALTAN, Yusif ZEYNALOV, Turgut AKGÜL, Ufuk TALU

THE RADIOLOGICAL ANALYSIS OF THE EFFECTS OF RALOXIFENE, NITRIC-OXIDE AND ESTROGEN ON SCOLIOSIS: A BIPEDAL C57BL6 MICE MODEL

Can Emre BAŞ, İbrahim AKEL, H. Gökhan DEMİRKIRAN, Emre ACAROĞLU

CAN ENDOSCOPIC LUMBAR DISCECTOMY VIDEOS SHARED ON YOUTUBE BE USED AS PATIENT EDUCATION TOOLS? A QUALITY CONTROL STUDY

Hüseyin Yener ERKEN, Salim KATAR

EFFECTIVENESS OF PATIENT-SPECIFIC THORACOLUMBAR BRACE TREATMENT FOR ADOLESCENT IDIOPATHIC SCOLIOSIS: A PROSPECTIVE COHORT STUDY

Şahin KARALAR, Serkan BAYRAM, Murat ALTAN, Mustafa Abdullah ÖZDEMİR, Turgut AKGÜL