Postural Model of Sagittal Spino-Pelvic Alignment and Its Relevance for Lumbosacral Developmental Spondylolisthesis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
STUDY DESIGN: Comparative study of sagittal spino-pelvic alignment in children and adolescents with developmental lumbosacral spondylolisthesis compared with asymptomatic subjects. OBJECTIVE: To develop a global postural model of sagittal spino-pelvic alignment. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: The relationships between parameters of sagittal spino-pelvic alignment in developmental spondylolisthesis are still unclear. METHODS: Radiographs of 120 control subjects and 131 subjects with developmental spondylolisthesis (91 low-grade, 40 high-grade) were reviewed. Subjects with high-grade spondylolisthesis were divided according to their sacro-pelvic alignment: balanced versus retroverted sacro-pelvis. Parameters of the sacro-pelvis (pelvic incidence, pelvic tilt, sacral slope), lumbosacral region (lumbosacral angle, slip percentage), lumbar spine (lumbar lordosis, lumbar tilt), thoracic spine (thoracic kyphosis, thoracic tilt), and global balance (spinal tilt, sagittal offset between C7 and femoral heads) were assessed. Parameters were compared between all groups and a correlation study was performed between all parameters. A postural model that includes the measured parameters was used to analyze the obtained correlations. RESULTS: Significant differences in all parameters are found between all groups, except for sagittal offset. The pattern and strength of correlations is similar between normal and low-grade subjects, showing interdependence between sacro-pelvic, lumbosacral, lumbar, and thoracic regions. The pattern of relationships was altered in high-grade spondylolisthesis, especially for subjects with a retroverted sacro-pelvis for which correlations between pelvic incidence and pelvic tilt, and between the sacro-pelvic unit and lumbar spine geometry are lost. CONCLUSION: Children and adolescents stand with a relatively constant global sagittal spino-pelvic alignment, regardless of the local lumbosacral deformity. A normal posture is maintained in low-grade spondylolisthesis and in high-grade spondylolisthesis with a balanced sacro-pelvis. Posture is abnormal in high-grade spondylolisthesis associated with a retroverted sacro-pelvis, suggesting that surgical reduction of the local lumbosacral deformity in these patients could be attempted to restore a normal posture.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".