You need to sign in or sign up before continuing.


  • Eur Spine J · Jun 2012

    Comparative Study

    A comparative study of axis-line-distance technique and Cobb method on assessing the curative effect on scoliosis.

    • Jia-Wei He, Guang-Hui Bai, Xin-Jian Ye, Kun Liu, Zhi-Han Yan, Xian Zhang, Xiang-Yang Wang, Yi-Xing Huang, and Zhi-Kang Yu.
    • Radiology Department, The 2nd Affiliated Hospital of Wenzhou Medical College, #109 Xue Yuan Xi Lu, Wenzhou, China.
    • Eur Spine J. 2012 Jun 1;21(6):1075-81.

    PurposeTo compare the axis-line-distance technique (ALDT) and Cobb method for therapeutic evaluation of scoliosis.MethodsFifty-seven patients with scoliosis were treated in our hospital, 47 underwent conservative bracing therapy and 10 underwent surgery. Based on 171 full-spine X-ray images obtained from these 57 cases before treatment, during conservative treatment or surgery, and at final follow-up after removing the brace or after surgery, two radiologists independently measured and calculated the correction rate during treatment and at final follow-up and the rate of correction loss after treatment with the ALDT and Cobb methods. Paired t-test and correlation analysis were performed.ResultsBased on the ALDT, the lateral deviations of the apical vertebrae before treatment, during treatment, and at final follow-up were 31 ± 14 mm, 16 ± 8 mm, and 20 ± 8 mm, respectively; the correction rates during treatment and at final follow-up were 48.7 ± 21.2% and 37.6 ± 14.2%, respectively, and the rate of correction loss after treatment was 11.3 ± 6.5%. The Cobb angles of scoliosis before treatment, during treatment, and at final follow-up were 34 ± 14°, 19 ± 7°, and 22 ± 6°, respectively; the correction rates during treatment and at final follow-up were 44.4 ± 17.3% and 33.9 ± 14.4%, respectively, and the rate of correction loss after treatment was 11.4 ± 4.3%. Calculation of the correction rate during treatment differed significantly between the two radiologists when using the Cobb method (P < 0.05); their calculations of the correction rate and rate of correction loss were not different (P > 0.05). The measurement data of the two radiologists using the Cobb method showed a weak to moderate correlation (r = 0.49, 0.57, and 0.51, respectively). When using the ALDT, there were no significant differences between the radiologists in their measurements of the correction rate during and after treatment (P > 0.05) or in the rate of correction loss. The measurement data of the two radiologists using the ALDT showed a good to excellent correlation (r = 0.92, 0.93, and 0.90, respectively).ConclusionThe ALDT is better than the Cobb method for therapeutic evaluation of scoliosis during treatment and at follow-up visits.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…