Perioperative outcomes in adolescent versus young adult patients with idiopathic scoliosis: how different are they?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare intra- and perioperative outcomes, complications, and magnitude of curve correction among patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS; 10-18 years old) and young adult idiopathic scoliosis (YAdIS; 19-40 years old). METHODS: A retrospective review of AIS and YAdIS patients who underwent primary corrective surgery at a single center was conducted. Demographic, radiographic, and operative data were collected at the pre- and perioperative periods. A 1:1 propensity score-matched analysis was implemented to limit selection bias by controlling for gender, curve type, total instrumented levels, and main coronal Cobb angle. RESULTS: Two hundred thirty-six patients (144 with AIS, 92 with YAdIS) were identified. Following propensity score matching, 85 matched pairs were identified. Radiographically, AIS had greater flexible main thoracic (mean -23.7% ± 14.1% vs -18.4% ± 11.0%, p = 0.0155) and thoracolumbar/lumbar curves (mean -32.0% ± 16.6% vs -28.5% ± 20.6%, p = 0.0229) preoperatively. The AIS group had a shorter operating room (OR) duration (mean 4.8 ± 1.3 vs 5.3 ± 1.5 hours, p = 0.0088), estimated blood loss (EBL; mean 654.7 ± 330.7 vs 806.7 ± 446.8 ml, p = 0.0092), and intraoperative transfusion rates (83.5% vs 96.5%, p = 0.0045). Postoperatively, the AIS patients had a lower rate of overall complications (9.4% vs 16.5%, p = 0.0412) and a lower transfusion rate (24.7% vs 40.0%, p = 0.0236). No differences in type of complication and hospital length of stay were observed (p > 0.05). AIS patients had smaller mean T10-12 thoracic kyphosis (TK; 6.3° ± 4.8° vs 9.0° ± 6.5°, p = 0.0242) and T1 pelvic angle (8.7° ± 8.2° vs 11.5° ± 8.7°, p = 0.048) postoperatively. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with idiopathic scoliosis who undergo corrective surgery as adolescents had more flexible curves with shorter OR times, less EBL, and lower perioperative complication rates than young adults. Radiographic correction of the major coronal curve and of thoracic sagittal kyphosis was similar for both groups. Overall, AIS and YAdIS patients can expect generally successful operative outcomes and low complication rates.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".