Assessing the Learning Curve of the Vertebral Body Tethering in Idiopathic Scoliosis: A Multicenter Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Anterior vertebral body tethering (AVBT) is a promising fusionless alternative for treating idiopathic scoliosis; however, limited data exist on the learning curve for this procedure. Previous studies are limited by single-center and short-term complication data. This multicenter study assesses the learning curve by evaluating improvements in operative characteristics over time and radiographic measurements up to 2 years postoperatively. METHODS: As recorded from a multicenter registry, surgeons with ≥10 index AVBT procedures for patients with idiopathic scoliosis aged 16 years and below were included. Relationships between case number and multiple surgical variables were determined using Pearson correlation and linear regression testing. For identification of an inflection point, consecutive cases were plotted against operative time per level and fitted with a locally weighted scatterplot smoothing curve. Independent samples t test and χ 2 test were used to compare outcomes between cases before and after the inflection point. Outcomes of interest included demographic, surgical, and radiographic information at the baseline, immediate postoperative, and 2-year timepointswhere available. RESULTS: Eight surgeons and 325 index AVBT patients met the inclusion criteria. Inverse relationships were identified between case number and estimated blood loss, operative time, anesthesia time, and fluoroscopic time per level ( P < 0.005). The inflection point was identified at 15 cases. Operative time, anesthesia time, and fluoroscopy time per level were greater in the first 15 cases compared with those after ( P < 0.05). There were no significant differences in demographic variables, intraoperative complications, or length of stay between the early and late cases. Greater correction in the major coronal curve, minor coronal curve, and coronal balance occurred in the cases performed after the inflection point ( P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: AVBT is a safe alternative to posterior spinal fusion and demonstrates a predictable improvement in surgical performance over time. Large improvements can be expected during the first 15 AVBT cases performed with minimal differences in complications. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".