File Download

There are no files associated with this item.

  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Article: A Prospective Comparison of the Coronal Deformity Correction in Thoracic Scoliosis Using Four Different Instrumentations and the Fulcrum-Bending Radiograph

TitleA Prospective Comparison of the Coronal Deformity Correction in Thoracic Scoliosis Using Four Different Instrumentations and the Fulcrum-Bending Radiograph
Authors
KeywordsCorrection rate
FBCI
Fulcrum-bending radiograph
Idiopathic scoliosis
Instrumentation
Issue Date2004
PublisherLippincott, Williams & Wilkins. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.spinejournal.com
Citation
Spine, 2004, v. 29 n. 5, p. 560-563 How to Cite?
AbstractStudy Design. A prospective study on comparing coronal deformity correction in thoracic scoliosis using four different instrumentations. Objectives. To compare the ability of four different instrumentation systems in correcting thoracic scoliosis based on the curve flexibility as reviewed by the fulcrum-bending radiograph. Summary of Background Data. The fulcrum-bending radiograph has been shown to be able to accurately reflect the flexibility of thoracic curves, and the fulcrum bending correction index (FBCI) predicts the amount of correction achieved by current surgical techniques. By recruiting curves of known flexibility, the efficacy of the different instrumentations in correcting coronal deformity can be truly compared. Methods. A consecutive series of 127 patients with Idiopathic scoliosis were treated by one of four implants: CD-Horizon (CD-H), Moss Miami (MM), TSRH, and ISOLA. All surgeries were performed by the same group of surgeons using the respective recommended techniques. FBCI was used to compare the correction achieved by these implants. Results. The mean FBCI/correction rate was 101.0%/ 57.9% in the TSRH group, 103.5%/58.5% in ISOLA, 109.1%/67.6% in CD-H, and 100.2%/62.7% in the MM group. The correction rate was significantly (P < 0.05) higher in the CD-H group than those in the TSRH and ISOLA groups, while the differences in the FBCI between the four implants were not statistically significant. Conclusions. When curve flexibility is taken into account, despite differences in material and design of four commonly used instrumentations, their ability to correct thoracic scoliosis is the same. Future studies describing surgical correction results should be based on the FBCI.
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/79326
ISSN
2015 Impact Factor: 2.439
2015 SCImago Journal Rankings: 1.459
ISI Accession Number ID
References

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorLuk, KDKen_HK
dc.contributor.authorLu, DSen_HK
dc.contributor.authorCheung, KMCen_HK
dc.contributor.authorWong, YWen_HK
dc.date.accessioned2010-09-06T07:53:25Z-
dc.date.available2010-09-06T07:53:25Z-
dc.date.issued2004en_HK
dc.identifier.citationSpine, 2004, v. 29 n. 5, p. 560-563en_HK
dc.identifier.issn0362-2436en_HK
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/79326-
dc.description.abstractStudy Design. A prospective study on comparing coronal deformity correction in thoracic scoliosis using four different instrumentations. Objectives. To compare the ability of four different instrumentation systems in correcting thoracic scoliosis based on the curve flexibility as reviewed by the fulcrum-bending radiograph. Summary of Background Data. The fulcrum-bending radiograph has been shown to be able to accurately reflect the flexibility of thoracic curves, and the fulcrum bending correction index (FBCI) predicts the amount of correction achieved by current surgical techniques. By recruiting curves of known flexibility, the efficacy of the different instrumentations in correcting coronal deformity can be truly compared. Methods. A consecutive series of 127 patients with Idiopathic scoliosis were treated by one of four implants: CD-Horizon (CD-H), Moss Miami (MM), TSRH, and ISOLA. All surgeries were performed by the same group of surgeons using the respective recommended techniques. FBCI was used to compare the correction achieved by these implants. Results. The mean FBCI/correction rate was 101.0%/ 57.9% in the TSRH group, 103.5%/58.5% in ISOLA, 109.1%/67.6% in CD-H, and 100.2%/62.7% in the MM group. The correction rate was significantly (P < 0.05) higher in the CD-H group than those in the TSRH and ISOLA groups, while the differences in the FBCI between the four implants were not statistically significant. Conclusions. When curve flexibility is taken into account, despite differences in material and design of four commonly used instrumentations, their ability to correct thoracic scoliosis is the same. Future studies describing surgical correction results should be based on the FBCI.en_HK
dc.languageengen_HK
dc.publisherLippincott, Williams & Wilkins. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.spinejournal.comen_HK
dc.relation.ispartofSpineen_HK
dc.subjectCorrection rateen_HK
dc.subjectFBCIen_HK
dc.subjectFulcrum-bending radiographen_HK
dc.subjectIdiopathic scoliosisen_HK
dc.subjectInstrumentationen_HK
dc.titleA Prospective Comparison of the Coronal Deformity Correction in Thoracic Scoliosis Using Four Different Instrumentations and the Fulcrum-Bending Radiographen_HK
dc.typeArticleen_HK
dc.identifier.openurlhttp://library.hku.hk:4550/resserv?sid=HKU:IR&issn=0887-9869&volume=29&issue=5&spage=560&epage=563&date=2004&atitle=A+prospective+comparison+of+the+coronal+deformity+correction+in+thoracic+scoliosis+using+four+different+instrumentations+and+the+fulcrum+bending+radiographen_HK
dc.identifier.emailLuk, KDK:hcm21000@hku.hken_HK
dc.identifier.emailCheung, KMC:cheungmc@hku.hken_HK
dc.identifier.authorityLuk, KDK=rp00333en_HK
dc.identifier.authorityCheung, KMC=rp00387en_HK
dc.description.naturelink_to_subscribed_fulltext-
dc.identifier.doi10.1097/01.BRS.0000106494.14707.B2en_HK
dc.identifier.pmid15129073-
dc.identifier.scopuseid_2-s2.0-1442311740en_HK
dc.identifier.hkuros87080en_HK
dc.relation.referenceshttp://www.scopus.com/mlt/select.url?eid=2-s2.0-1442311740&selection=ref&src=s&origin=recordpageen_HK
dc.identifier.volume29en_HK
dc.identifier.issue5en_HK
dc.identifier.spage560en_HK
dc.identifier.epage563en_HK
dc.identifier.isiWOS:000220041300015-
dc.publisher.placeUnited Statesen_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridLuk, KDK=7201921573en_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridLu, DS=7403079533en_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridCheung, KMC=7402406754en_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridWong, YW=36247941700en_HK

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats