Postoperative Distal Coronal Decompensation After Fusion to L3 for Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis Is Affected by Sagittal Pelvic Parameters
Bibliographic record
Abstract
STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective study. OBJECTIVE: To identify on early postoperative radiographs the risk factors for late distal decompensation in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) patients undergoing posterior fusion surgery to L3. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Sparing distal fusion levels in AIS surgery is considered beneficial for postoperative mobility and outcomes; nonetheless, late distal decompensation is of concern. L3 is often advocated as lower instrumented vertebra in posterior fusion, but progressive angulation of the L3/4 disc is commonly observed. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was conducted on 78 AIS patients who underwent posterior fusion to L3 from 2007 to 2014. Patients' demographic data, early and 2-year postoperative standing radiographs by biplanar imaging system were investigated. Late decompensation was defined as progressive increase of L3-4 disc wedging angle at 2-year follow-up. Coronal, sagittal, and rotational radiographic parameters were compared between those with and without decompensation. SRS-30 scores were reviewed. RESULTS: Mean age was 14.5-year, and fusion levels averaged 12.0 (range: 6-15); 43 out of 78 patients (55%) experienced progressive L3-4 disc wedging, with 6 showing wedging >5°. L3 translation from the central sacral vertical line (13.9 vs. 11.1 mm, P = 0.13) and increased pelvic tilt (13.3° vs. 8.6°, P = 0.06) on the early postoperative radiograph were associated with increased L3-4 disc wedging. Multivariate analysis revealed that larger pelvic tilt was a significant risk factor for decompensation (odds ratio = 1.1 per 1°, 95% confidence interval: 1.0-1.1, P = 0.04). SRS-30 scores did not differ significantly between the two groups (4.0 vs. 4.1, P = 0.44). CONCLUSIONS: Pelvic retroversion and increased translation of L3 from the central sacral line on the early postoperative radiograph were associated with late L3-4 disc wedging in AIS fusions to L3. Careful surgical planning and correction of sagittal alignment are imperative to ensure the long-term outcomes. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".