Thoracic Cage Deformity Correction in Patients with Lenke Type 1 Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Whether the thoracic cage deformity in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) can be sufficiently treated with vertebral derotation alone, has been quite controversial. Our aim is to control the hypothesis that the rib cage deformity (RCD) may be adequately corrected when only vertebral derotation is applied. We studied retrospectively patients treated for AIS with posterior spinal fusion without costoplasty. The RCD was assessed on lateral radiographs by rib index (RI). The correction of RI after surgery was calculated. Of the 103 patients that were finally included in our study, 29 patients (22 females and 7 males; mean age, 14.5 ± 2.1 years) represented Group A (Harrington rod instrumentation - no derotation), while 74 patients (61 females and 13 males; mean age, 14.1 ± 2.4 years) were operated with either a full pedicle screw system or a hybrid construct with hooks and pedicle screws (Group B-derotation). RI was significantly corrected after surgery in both groups. RI was significantly greater in Group A after surgery. Whatsoever, the correction of RI, thereby the RCD correction, did not significantly differ among groups. In conclusion, it cannot be suggested by the present study that vertebral derotation alone can offer an absolute correction of the deformity of the thoracic cage in patients with Lenke Type 1 AIS, and it seems also that the development of RCD may not exclusively result from the spinal deformity, thus questions can be further raised regarding scoliogeny per se.
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) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".