Axial plane dissimilarities of two identical Lenke-type 6C scoliosis cases visualized and analyzed by vertebral vectors

  • Tamás S. Illés
  • Máté Burkus
  • Szabolcs Somoskeőy
  • Fabien Lauer
  • Francois Lavaste
  • Jean F. Dubousset
Original Article

Abstract

Purpose

The global appearance of scoliosis in the horizontal plane is not really known. Therefore, the aims of this study were to analyze scoliosis in the horizontal plane using vertebral vectors in two patients classified with the same Lenke group, and to highlight the importance of the information obtained from these vertebral vector-based top-view images in clinical practice.

Methods

Two identical cases of scoliosis were selected, based on preoperative full-body standing anteroposterior and lateral radiographs obtained by the EOS™ 2D/3D system. Three-dimensional (3D) surface reconstructions of the spinal curves were performed by using sterEOS™ 3D software before and after surgery. In both patients, we also determined the vertebral vectors and horizontal plane coordinates for analyzing the curves mathematically before and after surgery.

Results

Despite the identical appearance of spinal curves in the frontal and sagittal planes, the horizontal views seemed to be significantly different. The vertebral vectors in the horizontal plane provided different types of parameters regarding scoliosis and the impact of surgical treatment: reducing lateral deviations, achieving harmony of the curves in the sagittal plane, and reducing rotations in the horizontal plane.

Conclusions

Vertebral vectors allow the evolution of scoliosis curve projections in the horizontal plane before and after surgical treatment, along with representation of the entire spine. The top view in the horizontal plane is essential to completely evaluate the scoliosis curves, because, despite the similar representations in the frontal and sagittal planes, the occurrence of scoliosis in the horizontal plane can be completely different.

Graphical abstract

These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material.

Keywords

Scoliosis Vertebral vector Horizontal plane Top view EOS™ 2D/3D 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We acknowledge Editage for language editing.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical standards

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informal consent

For this type of study, formal consent is not required.

Supplementary material

586_2018_5577_MOESM1_ESM.pptx (64.8 mb)
Supplementary material 1 (PPTX 66356 kb)

References

  1. 1.
    Graf H, Hecquet J, Dubousset J (1983) 3-Dimensional approach to spinal deformities. Application to the study of the prognosis of pediatric scoliosis. Rev Chir Orthop Reparatrice Appar Mot 69:407–416PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    De Smet AA, Tarlton MA, Cook LT, Berridge AS, Asher MA (1983) The top view for analysis of scoliosis progression. Radiology 2:369–372.  https://doi.org/10.1148/radiology.147.2.6340156 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Howell FR, Dickson RA (1989) The deformity of idiopathic scoliosis made visible by computer graphics. J Bone Jt Surg Br 71:399–403CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Vrtovec T, Franjo Pernus F, Likar B (2009) A review of methods for quantitative evaluation of axial vertebral rotation. Eur Spine J 18:1079–1090.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-009-0914-z CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Drerup B (1984) Improvements in measuring vertebral rotation from the projections of the pedicles. J Biomech 18:369–378CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Gardner-Morse M, Stokes IA (1994) Three-dimensional simulations of the scoliosis derotation maneuver with Cotrel-Dubousset instrumentation. J Biomech 27:177–181CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kojima T, Kurokawa T (1992) Rotation vector, a new method for representation of three-dimensional deformity in scoliosis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 17:1296–1303CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Stokes IA, Gardner-Morse M (1993) Three-dimensional simulation of Harrington distraction instrumentation for surgical correction of scoliosis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 18:2457–2464CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Stagnara P, Queneau P (1953) Scolioses évolutives en période de croissance: aspects cliniques, radiologiques, propositions thérapeutiques. Rev Chir Orthop 39:378–449PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Stokes IA (1994) Three-dimensional terminology of spinal deformity. A report presented to the Scoliosis Research Society by the Scoliosis Research Society Working Group on 3-D terminology of spinal deformity. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 19:236–248CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Yazici M, Acaroglu ER, Alanay A, Deviren V, Cila A, Surat A (2001) Measurement of vertebral rotation in standing versus supine position in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. J Pediatr Orthop 21:252–256PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Lenke LG, Betz RR, Harms J, Bridwell KH, Clements DH, Lowe TG, Blanke K (2001) Adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. A new classification to determine extent of spinal arthrodesis. J Bone Jt Surg Am 83-A:1169–1181CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Illés T, Tunyogi-Csapó M, Sz Somoskeőy (2011) Breakthrough in three-dimensional scoliosis diagnosis: significance of horizontal plane view and vertebra vectors. Eur Spine J 20:135–143.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-010-1566-8 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Dubousset J, Charpak G, Dorion I, Skalli W, Lavaste F, Deguise J, Kalifa G, Ferey S (2005) A new 2D and 3D imaging approach to musculoskeletal physiology and pathology with low-dose radiation and the standing position: the EOS system. Bull Acad Natl Med 189:287–297PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Le Bras A, Laporte S, Mitton D, de Guise JA, Skalli W (2002) 3D detailed reconstruction of vertebrae with low dose digital stereoradiography. Stud Health Technol Inform 91:286–290PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Laporte S, Skalli W, de Guise JA, Lavaste F, Mitton D (2003) A biplanar reconstruction method based on 2D and 3D contours: application to the distal femur. Comput Methods Biomech Biomed Engin 6:1–6.  https://doi.org/10.1080/1025584031000065956 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Atmaca H, Inanmaz ME, Bal E, Caliskan I, Kose KC (2014) Axial plane analysis of Lenke 1A adolescent idiopathic scoliosis as an aid to identify curve characteristics. Spine J 14:2425–2433.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spinee.2014.02.015 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Thong W, Parent S, Wu J, Aubin C-E, Labelle H, Kadoury S (2016) Three-dimensional morphology study of surgical adolescent idiopathic scoliosis patient from encoded geometric models. Eur Spine J 25:3104–3113.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-016-4426-3 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Seoud L, Cheriet F, Labelle H, Parent S (2015) Changes in trunk appearance after scoliosis spinal surgery and their relation to changes in spinal measurements. Spine Deform 3:595–603.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jspd.2015.05.001 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Illés TS, Somoskeőy S (2013) Comparison of scoliosis measurements based on three-dimensional vertebra vectors and conventional two-dimensional measurements: advantages in evaluation of prognosis and surgical results. Eur Spine J 22:1255–1263.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-012-2651-y CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Illés ST, Burkus M, Somoskeőy S, Lauer F, Lavaste F, Dubousset JF (2017) The horizontal plane appearances of scoliosis: what information can be obtained from top-view images? Int Orthop 41:2303–2311.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-017-3548-5 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Tamás S. Illés
    • 1
    • 2
    • 7
  • Máté Burkus
    • 3
  • Szabolcs Somoskeőy
    • 4
  • Fabien Lauer
    • 5
  • Francois Lavaste
    • 6
  • Jean F. Dubousset
    • 7
  1. 1.Department of Orthopedics and Traumatology, Brugmann University HospitalUniversité Libre de BruxellesBrusselsBelgium
  2. 2.Department of Orthopedic Surgery and Traumatology, Odense University Hospital, Institute of Clinical ResearchUniversity of Southern DenmarkOdenseDenmark
  3. 3.Department of Traumatology and Hand SurgeryPetz Aladár County Teaching HospitalGyőrHungary
  4. 4.Orthopedic Department, University Clinical CenterPécs UniversityPécsHungary
  5. 5.LORIA, Lorraine Research Laboratory in Computer Science and its ApplicationsUniversity of LorraineNancyFrance
  6. 6.Institute of Biomechanics Human Georges Charpak, Arts et Metiers ParisTechParisFrance
  7. 7.National Medical AcademyParisFrance

Personalised recommendations