Characteristics of Cobb angle distribution in the main thoracolumbar/lumbar curve in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A single-center retrospective analysis of 46 patients with Lenke 5 adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS).To compare Cobb angle distribution in different segments of the main thoracolumbar/lumbar curve in patients with Lenke 5 AIS, and differences in the lateral-bending flexibility, the correction rate, and correction index among these segments.No studies have been reported the ratio of the different segments to the main thoracolumbar/lumbar curve in terms of curve angle distribution, lateral-bending flexibility differences between these segments, and the correction rate when surgical instrumentations are used to correct scoliosis.Included in this study were 46 consecutive patients with Lenke 5 AIS. All of them received one-stage posterior correction and fusion with pedicle screw in the same center between January 2009 and January 2012. General data and radiological films before surgery, and at final follow-up were collected for further analysis. The wedging angles in the different discs were measured within main thoracolumbar/lumbar curve before and after surgery. This angle was also measured in the bending film. The preoperative flexibility, the correction rate, and the correction index of different disc segments were calculated.There were 44 (95.65%) female and 2 (4.35%) male included in this study, with the average age of 15.26 ± 2.19 years at the time of surgery. The mean Cobb angle was 45.09 ± 9.40°. The average disc wedge angles in AV - 2 (apex vetebrea-2), AV - 1, AV + 1, and AV + 2 segments were 5.59 ± 2.28°, 10.46 ± 3.41°, 9.85 ± 2.43°, 5.68 ± 2.80°, accounting for about 17.76%, 33.16%, 31.64%, and 17.44% of the Cobb angle in the main thoracolumbar/lumbar curve, respectively (P < .001). Flexibility of the supine lateral bending was 75.84%, 64.36%, 72.16% and 135.09% (P < .001), while the correction rates were 76.00%, 83.10%, 92.10%, and 109.65% (P < .001). The correction indexes were 1.16, 1.77, 2.02, and 1.11 for the disc of AV - 2, AV - 1, AV + 1, and AV + 2, respectively (P < .001).The disc angles are symmetric distribution in the main thoracolumbar/lumbar curve, and the distal segment is more flexible than the proximal/apical segments. Furthermore, the correction index is the highest in the apical vertebral segment.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".