Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Correlation of transverse rotation of the spine using surface topography and 3D reconstructive radiography in children with idiopathic scoliosis

  • Case Series
  • Published:
Spine Deformity Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

The relationship between axial surface rotation (ASR) measured by surface topography (ST) and axial vertebral rotation (AVR) measured by radiography in the transverse plane is not well defined. This study aimed to: (1) quantify ASR and AVR patterns and their magnitudes from T1 to L5; (2) determine the correlation or agreement between the ASR and AVR; and (3) investigate the relationship between axial rotation differences (ASR–AVR) and major Cobb angle.

Methods

This is a retrospective study evaluating patients (age 8–18) with IS or spinal asymmetry with both radiographic and ST measurements. Demographics, descriptive analysis, and correlations and agreements between ASR and AVR were evaluated. A piecewise linear regression model was further created to relate rotational differences to Cobb angle.

Results

Fifty-two subjects met inclusion criteria. Mean age was 14.1 ± 1.7 and 39 (75%) were female. Looking at patterns, AVR had maximal rotation at T8, while ASR had maximal rotation at T11 (r = 0.35, P = .006). Cobb angle was 24.1° ± 13.3° with AVR of − 1° ± 4.6° and scoliotic angle was 20.9° ± 11.5° with ASR of − 2.3° ± 6.6°. (ASR–AVR) vs Cobb angle was found to be very weakly correlated with a curve of less than 38.8° (r = 0.15, P = .001).

Conclusion

Our preliminary findings support that ASR measured by ST has a weak correlation with estimation of AVR by 3D radiographic reconstruction. This correlation may further help us to understand the application of transverse rotation in some clinical scenarios such as specific casting manipulation, padding mechanism in brace, and surgical correction of rib deformity.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Asher MA, Cook LT (1995) The transverse plane evolution of the most common adolescent idiopathic scoliosis deformities. A cross-sectional study of 181 patients. Spine 20(12):1386–1391

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Pesenti S, Pomero V, Prost S et al (2020) Curve location influences spinal balance in coronal and sagittal planes but not transversal trunk motion in adolescents with idiopathic scoliosis: a prospective observational study. Eur Spine J 29(8):1972–1980. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-020-06361-3

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Gum JL, Asher MA, Burton DC et al (2007) Transverse plane pelvic rotation in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: primary or compensatory? Eur Spine J 16(10):1579–1586. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-007-0400-4

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Courvoisier A, Drevelle X, Dubousset J et al (2013) Transverse plane 3D analysis of mild scoliosis. Eur Spine J 22(11):2427–2432. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-013-2862-x

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Wan SH-T, Wong DL-L, To SC-H et al (2023) Patient and surgical predictors of 3D correction in posterior spinal fusion: a systematic review. Eur Spine J. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-023-07708-2

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Li K, Wu J, Yang D et al (2023) Optimization of in-brace corrective force in adolescents with Lenke type 5 curve using finite element model. J Orthop Surg Res. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13018-023-03857-8

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Pasha S (2019) 3D spinal and rib cage predictors of brace effectiveness in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12891-019-2754-2

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Kenanidis E, Stamatopoulos T, Athanasiadou KI et al (2021) Can we predict the behavior of the scoliotic curve after bracing in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis? Tauhe prognostic value of apical vertebra rotation. Spine Deform 9(1):91–98. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43390-020-00184-4

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Wong LPK, Cheung PWH, Cheung JPY (2022) Curve type, flexibility, correction, and rotation are predictors of curve progression in patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis undergoing conservative treatment. Bone Joint J 104(4):424–432. https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620x.104b4.bjj-2021-1677.r1

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Loughenbury PR, Gentles SL, Murphy EJ et al (2021) Estimated cumulative X-ray exposure and additional cancer risk during the evaluation and treatment of scoliosis in children and young people requiring surgery. Spine Deform 9(4):949–954. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43390-021-00314-6

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Simony A, Hansen EJ, Christensen SB et al (2016) Incidence of cancer in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis patients treated 25 years previously. Eur Spine J 25(10):3366–3370. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-016-4747-2

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Luo TD, Stans AA, Schueler BA et al (2015) Cumulative Radiation Exposure With EOS Imaging Compared With Standard Spine Radiographs. Spine Deform 3(2):144–150. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jspd.2014.09.049

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Rehm J, Germann T, Akbar M et al (2017) 3D-modeling of the spine using EOS imaging system: Inter-reader reproducibility and reliability. PLoS ONE. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0171258

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Melhem E, Assi A, El Rachkidi R et al (2016) EOS(®) biplanar X-ray imaging: concept, developments, benefits, and limitations. J Child Orthop 10(1):1–14. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11832-016-0713-0

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Frerich JM, Hertzler K, Knott P et al (2012) Comparison of radiographic and surface topography measurements in adolescents with idiopathic scoliosis. Open Orthop J 6(1):261–265. https://doi.org/10.2174/1874325001206010261

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Komeili A, Westover LM, Parent EC et al (2014) Surface topography asymmetry maps categorizing external deformity in scoliosis. Spine J 14(6):973–83.e2. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spinee.2013.09.032

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Tabard-Fougère A, Bonnefoy-Mazure A, Hanquinet S et al (2017) Validity and reliability of spine rasterstereography in patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Spine 42(2):98–105. https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0000000000001679

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Knott P, Sturm P, Lonner B et al (2016) Multicenter Comparison of 3D Spinal Measurements Using Surface Topography With Those From Conventional Radiography. Spine Deform 4(2):98–103. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jspd.2015.08.008

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Applebaum A, Ference R, Cho W (2020) Evaluating the role of surface topography in the surveillance of scoliosis. Spine Deform 8(3):397–404. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43390-019-00001-7

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Lonner BS, Castillo A, Kassin G et al (2020) Surface topography assessment of body shape after surgical correction in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Spine Deform 8(2):213–220. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43390-020-00041-4

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Bagheri A, Liu XC, Tassone C et al (2018) Reliability of Three-Dimensional Spinal Modeling of Patients With Idiopathic Scoliosis Using EOS System. Spine Deform 6(3):207–212. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jspd.2017.09.055

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. 2022 A language and environment for statistical computing. Version version 4.1.3. R Foundation for Statistical Computing; https://www.R-project.org/

  23. Bland JM, Altman DG (1986) Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1(8476):307–310

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Wilczyński J (2021) Relationship between Muscle Tone of the Erector Spinae and the Concave and Convex Sides of Spinal Curvature in Low-Grade Scoliosis among Children. Children 8(12):1168. https://doi.org/10.3390/children8121168

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  25. Bassani T, Stucovitz E, Galbusera F et al (2019) Is rasterstereography a valid noninvasive method for the screening of juvenile and adolescent idiopathic scoliosis? Eur Spine J 28(3):526–535. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-018-05876-0

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Prosthetics BOa. (2003). Reference Manual for the Boston Scoliosis Brace. Retrieved 26 July 2023 https://www.bostonoandp.com/Customer-Content/www/CMS/files/BostonBraceManual.pdf

  27. Rigo M, Negrini S, Weiss H et al (2006) SOSORT consensus paper on brace action: TLSO biomechanics of correction (investigating the rationale for force vector selection. Scoliosis. https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-7161-1-11

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  28. Karam JA, Eid R, Kreichati G et al (2019) Optimizing the vertical position of the brace thoracic pad: apical rib or apical vertebra? Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 105(4):727–731. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.otsr.2019.03.004

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Brink RC, Homans JF, Schlösser TPC et al (2019) CT-based study of vertebral and intravertebral rotation in right thoracic adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Eur Spine J 28(12):3044–3052. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-019-06138-3

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Zapata KA, Virostek D, Davis K et al (2023) Early brace treatment for idiopathic scoliosis may change the paradigm to improve curves. Spine Deform. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43390-023-00726-6

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Sauvagnac R, Rigo M (2022) Evolution of Early Onset Scoliosis under Treatment with a 3D-Brace Concept. J Clin Med. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm11051186

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  32. Weinstein SL, Dolan LA, Wright JG et al (2013) Effects of Bracing in Adolescents with Idiopathic Scoliosis. N Engl J Med 369(16):1512–1521. https://doi.org/10.1056/nejmoa1307337

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Waldron SR, Poe-Kochert C, Son-Hing JP et al (2013) Early onset scoliosis: the value of serial risser casts. J Pediatr Orthop 33(8):775–780. https://doi.org/10.1097/BPO.0000000000000072

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Yang JH, Bhandarkar AW, Kasat NS et al (2013) Isolated percutaneous thoracoplasty procedure for skeletally mature adolescent idiopathic scoliosis patients, with rib deformity as their only concern: short-term outcomes. Spine 38(1):37–43. https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0b013e3182784cdc

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Nault ML, Mac-Thiong JM, Roy-Beaudry M et al (2014) Three-dimensional spinal morphology can differentiate between progressive and nonprogressive patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis at the initial presentation: a prospective study. Spine 39(10):E601–E606. https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0000000000000284

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  36. Nault ML, Beausejour M, Roy-Beaudry M et al (2020) A predictive model of progression for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis based on 3D spine parameters at first visit. Spine 45(9):605–611. https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0000000000003316

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Hu Z, Vergari C, Gajny L et al (2021) Comparison of 3D and 2D characterization of spinal geometry from biplanar X-rays: a large cohort study. Quant Imaging Med Surg 11(7):3306–3313. https://doi.org/10.21037/qims-20-861

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  38. Shen J, Parent S, Wu J et al (2020) Towards a new 3D classification for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Spine Deform 8(3):387–396. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43390-020-00051-2

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Pasha S, Ho-Fung V, Eker M et al (2020) Three-dimensional classification of the Lenke 1 adolescent idiopathic scoliosis using coronal and lateral spinal radiographs. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12891-020-03798-x

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank Mr. Ford Ellis, B.E, Musculoskeletal Functional Assessment Center, in the support of use of Diers 4D system. Our appreciation extends to Mr. Josh Schubring CPO, MSOP, Hanger Clinic-Children’s Greenfield Clinic for his critical comments on Boston brace.

Funding

The authors did not receive support from any organization for the submitted work.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Children’s Wisconsin, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI, USA

    Milan Patel, Xue-Cheng Liu, Channing Tassone, Benjamin Escott & John Thometz

  2. Division of Biostatistics, Institute for Health and Equity, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI, USA

    Kai Yang

  3. Musculoskeletal Functional Assessment Center, Greenfield Clinic, Children’s Wisconsin, Medical College of Wisconsin, 3365 S 103rd St, Suite 2206, Greenfield, WI, 53227, USA

    Xue-Cheng Liu, Channing Tassone, Benjamin Escott & John Thometz

Authors
  1. Milan Patel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Xue-Cheng Liu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Channing Tassone
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Benjamin Escott
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Kai Yang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. John Thometz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

MP: Performed the data collection, analysis, and wrote the draft of manuscript, X-CL: Study design, results review, and finalization of manuscript, CT: Results review and manuscript editing, BE: Results review and manuscript editing, KY: Statistical analysis and manuscript editing, JT: Results review and manuscript editing. And all authors read and approved the final version of the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Xue-Cheng Liu.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

None of authors have any financial interest that is directly or indirectly related to the work submitted for publication. The authors have no relevant non-financial interests to disclose.

Ethics approval

This study was approved by the Institutional Review Board, Children’s Wisconsin.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Patel, M., Liu, XC., Tassone, C. et al. Correlation of transverse rotation of the spine using surface topography and 3D reconstructive radiography in children with idiopathic scoliosis. Spine Deform (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s43390-024-00838-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s43390-024-00838-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation