How Does Anterior Vertebral Body Tethering Compare to Posterior Spinal Fusion for Thoracic Idiopathic Scoliosis? A Nonrandomized Clinical Trial
Recently, there has been an increased interest in alternative surgical options for treating idiopathic scoliosis. For instance, anterior vertebral body tethering (AVBT) is an emerging surgical solution used in lieu of posterior spinal fusion (PSF). This technology has been gaining in popularity beca...
Uloženo v:
| Vydáno v: | Clinical orthopaedics and related research Ročník 483; číslo 12; s. 2366 |
|---|---|
| Hlavní autoři: | , , , , , , , |
| Médium: | Journal Article |
| Jazyk: | angličtina |
| Vydáno: |
United States
01.12.2025
|
| Témata: | |
| ISSN: | 1528-1132, 1528-1132 |
| On-line přístup: | Zjistit podrobnosti o přístupu |
| Tagy: |
Přidat tag
Žádné tagy, Buďte první, kdo vytvoří štítek k tomuto záznamu!
|
| Abstract | Recently, there has been an increased interest in alternative surgical options for treating idiopathic scoliosis. For instance, anterior vertebral body tethering (AVBT) is an emerging surgical solution used in lieu of posterior spinal fusion (PSF). This technology has been gaining in popularity because of its potential benefits of preservation of spinal growth, motion, and functional activity. Although prior retrospective studies have indicated the potential efficacy of AVBT in patients with primary thoracic curves, a direct comparison to PSF, the most widely used definitive treatment for pediatric scoliosis, has yet to be conducted. Differences in efficacy, quality of life, and revision risk may exist across the techniques.
We compared AVBT to PSF in terms of (1) the proportion of patients whose main thoracic curve was corrected to < 50° without a return to the operating room for revision within 2 years, (2) residual thoracic and lumbar curve magnitude at 2 years, (3) health-related quality of life (HRQoL) scores, and (4) the frequency of serious complications and healthcare resource utilization.
From 2017 to 2022, patients (n = 87) were assessed for eligibility to participate in an FDA-approved investigational device exemption clinical trial for AVBT based on presenting to the clinic with a diagnosis of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis that had entered into surgical range. Based on clinical characteristics and the family's stated goals of care, AVBT and PSF were both discussed, but ultimately the patient and their family selected their preferred treatment. Under guidance from the FDA, a sample of 20 patients who met the inclusion criteria of a Lenke Type 1 or 2 curve classification, a thoracic curve between 35° and 60°, a lumbar curve < 35°, and a skeletal maturity score of either Risser 0 or Sanders bone age of ≤ 4 were eligible to participate in the trial and undergo AVBT. Patients with Lenke 1 and 2 curves who elected to undergo PSF (n = 27) were prospectively analyzed for comparison. No patients who underwent AVBT and 22% (n = 6) of those who underwent PSF were lost prior to the minimum study follow-up of 2 years, leaving 100% (20) and 78% (n = 21) in each group, respectively, for analysis. All patients in the PSF group who were lost to follow-up did not report any complications at 1 year. Patients who underwent AVBT (80% [ 16 ] girls) were generally younger, more skeletally immature, and had smaller preoperative curvature at the time of surgery compared with patients who underwent PSF (81% [ 17 ] girls). No differences in gender, height, or revised Scoliosis Research Society-22 (SRS-22) patient questionnaire scores were observed across the two groups at baseline. Patients in both cohorts were followed at the preoperative, first erect, and 2-year time points. Radiographic, health-related quality of life, unplanned return to the operating room, complications, and healthcare resource utilization outcomes were compared.
Scoliosis curves were reduced to < 50°, without unplanned return to the operating room, at 2 years in 70% (14 of 20) of patients who underwent AVBT and 100% (21 of 21) of patients who had PSF (p < 0.001). No patients who had PSF underwent revisions. Although both groups showed postoperative curve correction, patients who had AVBT showed less curve correction at first erect (35% versus 65% correction; p < 0.001) and at 2 years (34% versus 61% correction; p < 0.001). No differences were found in any revised SRS-22 domains or total score at 2 years between the AVBT and PSF groups (4.3 ± 0.5 versus 4.5 ± 0.4; p = 0.14). No instrumentation complications occurred in the PSF group. Thirty-five percent (7) of patients who received AVBT experienced a tether rupture, and 30% (6) of patients who received a tether required a revision procedure prior to the 2-year follow-up. Intraoperative data revealed that AVBT resulted in a shorter length of stay (2 ± 1 versus 3 ± 1 days; p = 0.02) and fewer levels instrumented (7 ± 1 versus 10 ± 1 levels; p < 0.001); however, there was increased operative time when compared with PSF (231 ± 41 versus 194 ± 26 minutes; p = 0.001).
Pediatric orthopaedic spine surgeons should carefully consider discussing the use of vertebral body tethering with their patients who have adolescent idiopathic scoliosis, as this evidence points to the more established technique of PSF leading to better outcomes. Additional research supporting AVBT as noninferior to PSF in radiographic and safety measures is needed before the procedure becomes widely available to patients and their families.
Level III, therapeutic study. |
|---|---|
| AbstractList | Recently, there has been an increased interest in alternative surgical options for treating idiopathic scoliosis. For instance, anterior vertebral body tethering (AVBT) is an emerging surgical solution used in lieu of posterior spinal fusion (PSF). This technology has been gaining in popularity because of its potential benefits of preservation of spinal growth, motion, and functional activity. Although prior retrospective studies have indicated the potential efficacy of AVBT in patients with primary thoracic curves, a direct comparison to PSF, the most widely used definitive treatment for pediatric scoliosis, has yet to be conducted. Differences in efficacy, quality of life, and revision risk may exist across the techniques.BACKGROUNDRecently, there has been an increased interest in alternative surgical options for treating idiopathic scoliosis. For instance, anterior vertebral body tethering (AVBT) is an emerging surgical solution used in lieu of posterior spinal fusion (PSF). This technology has been gaining in popularity because of its potential benefits of preservation of spinal growth, motion, and functional activity. Although prior retrospective studies have indicated the potential efficacy of AVBT in patients with primary thoracic curves, a direct comparison to PSF, the most widely used definitive treatment for pediatric scoliosis, has yet to be conducted. Differences in efficacy, quality of life, and revision risk may exist across the techniques.We compared AVBT to PSF in terms of (1) the proportion of patients whose main thoracic curve was corrected to < 50° without a return to the operating room for revision within 2 years, (2) residual thoracic and lumbar curve magnitude at 2 years, (3) health-related quality of life (HRQoL) scores, and (4) the frequency of serious complications and healthcare resource utilization.QUESTIONS/PURPOSESWe compared AVBT to PSF in terms of (1) the proportion of patients whose main thoracic curve was corrected to < 50° without a return to the operating room for revision within 2 years, (2) residual thoracic and lumbar curve magnitude at 2 years, (3) health-related quality of life (HRQoL) scores, and (4) the frequency of serious complications and healthcare resource utilization.From 2017 to 2022, patients (n = 87) were assessed for eligibility to participate in an FDA-approved investigational device exemption clinical trial for AVBT based on presenting to the clinic with a diagnosis of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis that had entered into surgical range. Based on clinical characteristics and the family's stated goals of care, AVBT and PSF were both discussed, but ultimately the patient and their family selected their preferred treatment. Under guidance from the FDA, a sample of 20 patients who met the inclusion criteria of a Lenke Type 1 or 2 curve classification, a thoracic curve between 35° and 60°, a lumbar curve < 35°, and a skeletal maturity score of either Risser 0 or Sanders bone age of ≤ 4 were eligible to participate in the trial and undergo AVBT. Patients with Lenke 1 and 2 curves who elected to undergo PSF (n = 27) were prospectively analyzed for comparison. No patients who underwent AVBT and 22% (n = 6) of those who underwent PSF were lost prior to the minimum study follow-up of 2 years, leaving 100% (20) and 78% (n = 21) in each group, respectively, for analysis. All patients in the PSF group who were lost to follow-up did not report any complications at 1 year. Patients who underwent AVBT (80% [16] girls) were generally younger, more skeletally immature, and had smaller preoperative curvature at the time of surgery compared with patients who underwent PSF (81% [17] girls). No differences in gender, height, or revised Scoliosis Research Society-22 (SRS-22) patient questionnaire scores were observed across the two groups at baseline. Patients in both cohorts were followed at the preoperative, first erect, and 2-year time points. Radiographic, health-related quality of life, unplanned return to the operating room, complications, and healthcare resource utilization outcomes were compared.METHODSFrom 2017 to 2022, patients (n = 87) were assessed for eligibility to participate in an FDA-approved investigational device exemption clinical trial for AVBT based on presenting to the clinic with a diagnosis of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis that had entered into surgical range. Based on clinical characteristics and the family's stated goals of care, AVBT and PSF were both discussed, but ultimately the patient and their family selected their preferred treatment. Under guidance from the FDA, a sample of 20 patients who met the inclusion criteria of a Lenke Type 1 or 2 curve classification, a thoracic curve between 35° and 60°, a lumbar curve < 35°, and a skeletal maturity score of either Risser 0 or Sanders bone age of ≤ 4 were eligible to participate in the trial and undergo AVBT. Patients with Lenke 1 and 2 curves who elected to undergo PSF (n = 27) were prospectively analyzed for comparison. No patients who underwent AVBT and 22% (n = 6) of those who underwent PSF were lost prior to the minimum study follow-up of 2 years, leaving 100% (20) and 78% (n = 21) in each group, respectively, for analysis. All patients in the PSF group who were lost to follow-up did not report any complications at 1 year. Patients who underwent AVBT (80% [16] girls) were generally younger, more skeletally immature, and had smaller preoperative curvature at the time of surgery compared with patients who underwent PSF (81% [17] girls). No differences in gender, height, or revised Scoliosis Research Society-22 (SRS-22) patient questionnaire scores were observed across the two groups at baseline. Patients in both cohorts were followed at the preoperative, first erect, and 2-year time points. Radiographic, health-related quality of life, unplanned return to the operating room, complications, and healthcare resource utilization outcomes were compared.Scoliosis curves were reduced to < 50°, without unplanned return to the operating room, at 2 years in 70% (14 of 20) of patients who underwent AVBT and 100% (21 of 21) of patients who had PSF (p < 0.001). No patients who had PSF underwent revisions. Although both groups showed postoperative curve correction, patients who had AVBT showed less curve correction at first erect (35% versus 65% correction; p < 0.001) and at 2 years (34% versus 61% correction; p < 0.001). No differences were found in any revised SRS-22 domains or total score at 2 years between the AVBT and PSF groups (4.3 ± 0.5 versus 4.5 ± 0.4; p = 0.14). No instrumentation complications occurred in the PSF group. Thirty-five percent (7) of patients who received AVBT experienced a tether rupture, and 30% (6) of patients who received a tether required a revision procedure prior to the 2-year follow-up. Intraoperative data revealed that AVBT resulted in a shorter length of stay (2 ± 1 versus 3 ± 1 days; p = 0.02) and fewer levels instrumented (7 ± 1 versus 10 ± 1 levels; p < 0.001); however, there was increased operative time when compared with PSF (231 ± 41 versus 194 ± 26 minutes; p = 0.001).RESULTSScoliosis curves were reduced to < 50°, without unplanned return to the operating room, at 2 years in 70% (14 of 20) of patients who underwent AVBT and 100% (21 of 21) of patients who had PSF (p < 0.001). No patients who had PSF underwent revisions. Although both groups showed postoperative curve correction, patients who had AVBT showed less curve correction at first erect (35% versus 65% correction; p < 0.001) and at 2 years (34% versus 61% correction; p < 0.001). No differences were found in any revised SRS-22 domains or total score at 2 years between the AVBT and PSF groups (4.3 ± 0.5 versus 4.5 ± 0.4; p = 0.14). No instrumentation complications occurred in the PSF group. Thirty-five percent (7) of patients who received AVBT experienced a tether rupture, and 30% (6) of patients who received a tether required a revision procedure prior to the 2-year follow-up. Intraoperative data revealed that AVBT resulted in a shorter length of stay (2 ± 1 versus 3 ± 1 days; p = 0.02) and fewer levels instrumented (7 ± 1 versus 10 ± 1 levels; p < 0.001); however, there was increased operative time when compared with PSF (231 ± 41 versus 194 ± 26 minutes; p = 0.001).Pediatric orthopaedic spine surgeons should carefully consider discussing the use of vertebral body tethering with their patients who have adolescent idiopathic scoliosis, as this evidence points to the more established technique of PSF leading to better outcomes. Additional research supporting AVBT as noninferior to PSF in radiographic and safety measures is needed before the procedure becomes widely available to patients and their families.CONCLUSIONPediatric orthopaedic spine surgeons should carefully consider discussing the use of vertebral body tethering with their patients who have adolescent idiopathic scoliosis, as this evidence points to the more established technique of PSF leading to better outcomes. Additional research supporting AVBT as noninferior to PSF in radiographic and safety measures is needed before the procedure becomes widely available to patients and their families.Level III, therapeutic study.LEVEL OF EVIDENCELevel III, therapeutic study. Recently, there has been an increased interest in alternative surgical options for treating idiopathic scoliosis. For instance, anterior vertebral body tethering (AVBT) is an emerging surgical solution used in lieu of posterior spinal fusion (PSF). This technology has been gaining in popularity because of its potential benefits of preservation of spinal growth, motion, and functional activity. Although prior retrospective studies have indicated the potential efficacy of AVBT in patients with primary thoracic curves, a direct comparison to PSF, the most widely used definitive treatment for pediatric scoliosis, has yet to be conducted. Differences in efficacy, quality of life, and revision risk may exist across the techniques. We compared AVBT to PSF in terms of (1) the proportion of patients whose main thoracic curve was corrected to < 50° without a return to the operating room for revision within 2 years, (2) residual thoracic and lumbar curve magnitude at 2 years, (3) health-related quality of life (HRQoL) scores, and (4) the frequency of serious complications and healthcare resource utilization. From 2017 to 2022, patients (n = 87) were assessed for eligibility to participate in an FDA-approved investigational device exemption clinical trial for AVBT based on presenting to the clinic with a diagnosis of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis that had entered into surgical range. Based on clinical characteristics and the family's stated goals of care, AVBT and PSF were both discussed, but ultimately the patient and their family selected their preferred treatment. Under guidance from the FDA, a sample of 20 patients who met the inclusion criteria of a Lenke Type 1 or 2 curve classification, a thoracic curve between 35° and 60°, a lumbar curve < 35°, and a skeletal maturity score of either Risser 0 or Sanders bone age of ≤ 4 were eligible to participate in the trial and undergo AVBT. Patients with Lenke 1 and 2 curves who elected to undergo PSF (n = 27) were prospectively analyzed for comparison. No patients who underwent AVBT and 22% (n = 6) of those who underwent PSF were lost prior to the minimum study follow-up of 2 years, leaving 100% (20) and 78% (n = 21) in each group, respectively, for analysis. All patients in the PSF group who were lost to follow-up did not report any complications at 1 year. Patients who underwent AVBT (80% [ 16 ] girls) were generally younger, more skeletally immature, and had smaller preoperative curvature at the time of surgery compared with patients who underwent PSF (81% [ 17 ] girls). No differences in gender, height, or revised Scoliosis Research Society-22 (SRS-22) patient questionnaire scores were observed across the two groups at baseline. Patients in both cohorts were followed at the preoperative, first erect, and 2-year time points. Radiographic, health-related quality of life, unplanned return to the operating room, complications, and healthcare resource utilization outcomes were compared. Scoliosis curves were reduced to < 50°, without unplanned return to the operating room, at 2 years in 70% (14 of 20) of patients who underwent AVBT and 100% (21 of 21) of patients who had PSF (p < 0.001). No patients who had PSF underwent revisions. Although both groups showed postoperative curve correction, patients who had AVBT showed less curve correction at first erect (35% versus 65% correction; p < 0.001) and at 2 years (34% versus 61% correction; p < 0.001). No differences were found in any revised SRS-22 domains or total score at 2 years between the AVBT and PSF groups (4.3 ± 0.5 versus 4.5 ± 0.4; p = 0.14). No instrumentation complications occurred in the PSF group. Thirty-five percent (7) of patients who received AVBT experienced a tether rupture, and 30% (6) of patients who received a tether required a revision procedure prior to the 2-year follow-up. Intraoperative data revealed that AVBT resulted in a shorter length of stay (2 ± 1 versus 3 ± 1 days; p = 0.02) and fewer levels instrumented (7 ± 1 versus 10 ± 1 levels; p < 0.001); however, there was increased operative time when compared with PSF (231 ± 41 versus 194 ± 26 minutes; p = 0.001). Pediatric orthopaedic spine surgeons should carefully consider discussing the use of vertebral body tethering with their patients who have adolescent idiopathic scoliosis, as this evidence points to the more established technique of PSF leading to better outcomes. Additional research supporting AVBT as noninferior to PSF in radiographic and safety measures is needed before the procedure becomes widely available to patients and their families. Level III, therapeutic study. |
| Author | Capraro, Anthony Talwar, Divya Qiu, Catherine Lott, Carina Anari, Jason B Gordon, James Cahill, Patrick J Flynn, John M |
| Author_xml | – sequence: 1 givenname: Carina surname: Lott fullname: Lott, Carina organization: Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, Philadelphia, PA, USA – sequence: 2 givenname: Anthony surname: Capraro fullname: Capraro, Anthony – sequence: 3 givenname: Catherine surname: Qiu fullname: Qiu, Catherine – sequence: 4 givenname: Divya surname: Talwar fullname: Talwar, Divya – sequence: 5 givenname: James surname: Gordon fullname: Gordon, James – sequence: 6 givenname: John M surname: Flynn fullname: Flynn, John M – sequence: 7 givenname: Jason B surname: Anari fullname: Anari, Jason B – sequence: 8 givenname: Patrick J orcidid: 0000-0002-7129-1007 surname: Cahill fullname: Cahill, Patrick J |
| BackLink | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/40537949$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed |
| BookMark | eNpNkMFOwzAMhiMEAjZ4BFCOXDaapFm7ExqFsUkIEAyuU5q4LKiNS9IJjZfglQliSPhg_7Y_W7J7ZNehA0JOWDJkyTg7L-4fH4fJPxMykzvkkEmeDxgTfPefPiC9EN5-oFTyfXKQJlJk43R8SL5m-EGvEAKduA68RU9fwHdQelXTSzQbuoBuFRvulRbYtMoD7ZA-YNjST611EZ2ug0VHq1hZrNArbTWdG4ut6lZRPmmsLQYbLuiE3qHzyhls7CcYWtTWWR1XLLxV9RHZq1Qd4Hgb--R5er0oZoPb-5t5MbkdaCGZHMgqYYqnCTM8qzI-Ko0EKLOkNInWBoCXFag8nqjEOOYs-hFnKRM6jmkGvE_Ofve2Ht_XELplY4OGulYOcB2WgnM-ErnI84iebtF12YBZtt42ym-Wf0_k3yyheOw |
| CitedBy_id | crossref_primary_10_3390_jcm14165676 |
| ContentType | Journal Article |
| Copyright | Copyright © 2025 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of the Association of Bone and Joint Surgeons. |
| Copyright_xml | – notice: Copyright © 2025 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of the Association of Bone and Joint Surgeons. |
| DBID | CGR CUY CVF ECM EIF NPM 7X8 |
| DOI | 10.1097/CORR.0000000000003575 |
| DatabaseName | Medline MEDLINE MEDLINE (Ovid) MEDLINE MEDLINE PubMed MEDLINE - Academic |
| DatabaseTitle | MEDLINE Medline Complete MEDLINE with Full Text PubMed MEDLINE (Ovid) MEDLINE - Academic |
| DatabaseTitleList | MEDLINE - Academic MEDLINE |
| Database_xml | – sequence: 1 dbid: NPM name: PubMed url: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=PubMed sourceTypes: Index Database – sequence: 2 dbid: 7X8 name: MEDLINE - Academic url: https://search.proquest.com/medline sourceTypes: Aggregation Database |
| DeliveryMethod | no_fulltext_linktorsrc |
| EISSN | 1528-1132 |
| ExternalDocumentID | 40537949 |
| Genre | Clinical Trial Journal Article Comparative Study |
| GroupedDBID | --- -~X .86 .VR 06C 06D 0R~ 0VY 199 1N0 203 29B 29~ 2J2 2KG 2KM 2LR 2WC 30V 4.4 408 40D 40E 40H 4Q1 4Q2 4Q3 5GY 5RE 5VS 67Z 6J9 6NX 6PF 78A 7O~ 7RV 8TC 8UJ 95- 95. 95~ 96X AAAAV AABHQ AAFWJ AAGIX AAHPQ AAIQE AAJKR AAMOA AAQKA AARTL AASCR AASXQ AAWCG AAWTL AAYIU AAYQN AAYTO ABASU ABDIG ABHLI ABJNI ABJOX ABMNI ABNWP ABPLI ABPPZ ABPXF ABUWZ ABVCZ ABZZY ACBKD ACGFO ACGFS ACGUR ACHVE ACHXU ACIHN ACILI ACKNC ACLDA ACNWC ACOAL ACPRK ACREN ACXJB ACZKN ADBBV ADGGA ADHIR ADHPY ADKPE ADKSD ADSXY AEAQA AEGNC AEJHL AENEX AETLH AFBBN AFBFQ AFDTB AFJLC AFWTZ AFZKB AGQMX AGWIL AGWZB AGYKE AHMBA AHOMT AHQNM AHYZX AIIXL AINUH AJCLO AJIOK AJNWD AJRNO AJZMW AKCTQ AKMHD AKULP ALKUP ALMA_UNASSIGNED_HOLDINGS ALMTX ALWAN AMJPA AMKUR AMNEI AOHHW AOIJS AOQMC ARMRJ ASPBG AVWKF AZFZN B-. BA0 BAWUL BQLVK BYPQX C45 CGR CS3 CUY CVF DIWNM E3Z EBS ECM EEVPB EIF ERAAH ESBYG F5P FCALG FRRFC FWDCC G-Y G-Z GGRSB GNXGY GQDEL H0~ HF~ HG5 HLICF HLJTE HMJXF HRMNR HZ~ IKREB IKYAY ITM IXC IZQ I~X I~Z J0Z JBSCW JK3 JK8 KMI KOV KPH L7B MA- N9A NPM O9- O93 O9I OAG OAH OB4 ODA OK1 OL1 OLB OLH OLU OLV OLY OLZ OPUJH OVD OVDNE OVIDH OWU OWV OWW OWX OWY OWZ OXXIT P2P P9S PF0 PONUX QOS R89 R9I RLZ RPM RPX RRX RSV S16 S1Z S27 S37 S3B S4R SAP SDH SHX SMD SOJ SZ9 SZN T13 TEORI TR2 TSK TSPGW TT1 TUC TWZ U2A U9L UG4 VC2 VVN W48 WAF WH7 WK8 X3V X3W XXN XYM YFH YOC YQY Z45 ZB8 ZFV ZOVNA 7X8 |
| ID | FETCH-LOGICAL-c3515-5f01a2401d27f726bd5eeb70bd0ccdee2bfea8794a39cde139c621413c1a2c1e2 |
| IEDL.DBID | 7X8 |
| ISSN | 1528-1132 |
| IngestDate | Thu Oct 02 22:33:18 EDT 2025 Wed Dec 10 10:58:50 EST 2025 |
| IsDoiOpenAccess | false |
| IsOpenAccess | true |
| IsPeerReviewed | true |
| IsScholarly | true |
| Issue | 12 |
| Language | English |
| License | Copyright © 2025 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of the Association of Bone and Joint Surgeons. |
| LinkModel | DirectLink |
| MergedId | FETCHMERGED-LOGICAL-c3515-5f01a2401d27f726bd5eeb70bd0ccdee2bfea8794a39cde139c621413c1a2c1e2 |
| Notes | ObjectType-Article-1 SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1 ObjectType-Feature-2 content type line 23 |
| ORCID | 0000-0002-7129-1007 |
| OpenAccessLink | https://ovidsp.ovid.com/ovidweb.cgi?T=JS&NEWS=n&CSC=Y&PAGE=fulltext&D=ovft&DO=10.1097/CORR.0000000000003575 |
| PMID | 40537949 |
| PQID | 3222638388 |
| PQPubID | 23479 |
| ParticipantIDs | proquest_miscellaneous_3222638388 pubmed_primary_40537949 |
| PublicationCentury | 2000 |
| PublicationDate | 2025-December |
| PublicationDateYYYYMMDD | 2025-12-01 |
| PublicationDate_xml | – month: 12 year: 2025 text: 2025-December |
| PublicationDecade | 2020 |
| PublicationPlace | United States |
| PublicationPlace_xml | – name: United States |
| PublicationTitle | Clinical orthopaedics and related research |
| PublicationTitleAlternate | Clin Orthop Relat Res |
| PublicationYear | 2025 |
| SSID | ssj0003452 |
| Score | 2.4887094 |
| Snippet | Recently, there has been an increased interest in alternative surgical options for treating idiopathic scoliosis. For instance, anterior vertebral body... |
| SourceID | proquest pubmed |
| SourceType | Aggregation Database Index Database |
| StartPage | 2366 |
| SubjectTerms | Adolescent Child Female Humans Male Postoperative Complications - etiology Quality of Life Reoperation Scoliosis - diagnostic imaging Scoliosis - physiopathology Scoliosis - surgery Spinal Fusion - adverse effects Spinal Fusion - methods Thoracic Vertebrae - diagnostic imaging Thoracic Vertebrae - physiopathology Thoracic Vertebrae - surgery Time Factors Treatment Outcome Vertebral Body - diagnostic imaging Vertebral Body - physiopathology Vertebral Body - surgery |
| Title | How Does Anterior Vertebral Body Tethering Compare to Posterior Spinal Fusion for Thoracic Idiopathic Scoliosis? A Nonrandomized Clinical Trial |
| URI | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/40537949 https://www.proquest.com/docview/3222638388 |
| Volume | 483 |
| hasFullText | |
| inHoldings | 1 |
| isFullTextHit | |
| isPrint | |
| link | http://cvtisr.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link/0/eLvHCXMwpV1da9swFBX9euhLP-japWvHHfTV1JHkSHoqWbbQQZuFJCt5C7Ikb4bMSuO0Y_sT-8u9sh3yNCjMDwaDBEY6ujq69-oeQq6Y1dw6wSKrlY04pTpKhVZRLLUKHn1bF55_uBODgZxO1bBxuJVNWuXaJlaG2noTfOTXISKAWGFS3iweo6AaFaKrjYTGNtllSGVCSpeYbqqFM14p7uAWhSclPHatb_Aocd37OhrVtQubhyUi-TfLrHab_uH__ucROWh4JnRrYByTLVeckL-3_hd88q6EbhjP3C_hwS1XIXY8h4_e_oaJqy8EfodenZwOKw9B0LduPV4EES3oPwUfGyDfhckPxJDJDXyxua_kjQ2MEVy5L_PyBrowCPoFhfU_8z_OQlOGdA6TAPw35Fv_86R3GzWKDJFhSHyiJIvbGjlA21KRCdpJbeJcKuLUxsZY52iaOS1xiWum8BunxHRoG_dJg91M29FTslP4wr0lwNGuMsl5xoTkNO2oVKexzCQe1ZGUCNkiH9bjO0PEhzCGLpx_KmebEW6Rs3qSZou6NMeMh_I0iqvzV_R-R_ZpEPOtclMuyG6G691dkj3zvMrL5fsKSvgeDO9fAOB31IE |
| linkProvider | ProQuest |
| openUrl | ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info%3Aofi%2Fenc%3AUTF-8&rfr_id=info%3Asid%2Fsummon.serialssolutions.com&rft_val_fmt=info%3Aofi%2Ffmt%3Akev%3Amtx%3Ajournal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=How+Does+Anterior+Vertebral+Body+Tethering+Compare+to+Posterior+Spinal+Fusion+for+Thoracic+Idiopathic+Scoliosis%3F+A+Nonrandomized+Clinical+Trial&rft.jtitle=Clinical+orthopaedics+and+related+research&rft.au=Lott%2C+Carina&rft.au=Capraro%2C+Anthony&rft.au=Qiu%2C+Catherine&rft.au=Talwar%2C+Divya&rft.date=2025-12-01&rft.issn=1528-1132&rft.eissn=1528-1132&rft_id=info:doi/10.1097%2FCORR.0000000000003575&rft.externalDBID=NO_FULL_TEXT |
| thumbnail_l | http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/lc.gif&issn=1528-1132&client=summon |
| thumbnail_m | http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/mc.gif&issn=1528-1132&client=summon |
| thumbnail_s | http://covers-cdn.summon.serialssolutions.com/index.aspx?isbn=/sc.gif&issn=1528-1132&client=summon |