6
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Bracing for juvenile idiopathic scoliosis: retrospective review from bracing to skeletal maturity

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Juvenile idiopathic scoliosis (JIS) outcomes with brace treatment are limited with poorly described bracing protocols. Between 49 and 100% of children with JIS will progress to surgery, however, young age, long follow-up, and varying treatment methods make studying this population difficult. The purpose of this study is to report the outcomes of bracing in JIS treated with a Boston brace™ and identify risk factors for progression and surgical intervention.

          Methods

          This is a single-center retrospective review of 175 patients with JIS who initiated brace treatment between the age of 4 and 9 years. A cohort of 140 children reached skeletal maturity; 91 children had surgery or at least 2 year follow-up after brace completion. Standard in-brace protocol for scoliosis 320° was a Boston brace for 18–20 h/day after MRI ( n = 82). Family history, MRI abnormalities, comorbidities, curve type, curve magnitude, bracing duration, number of braces, compliance by report, and surgical interventions were recorded.

          Results

          Children were average 7.9 years old (range 4.1–9.8) at the initiation of bracing. The Boston brace™ was prescribed in 82 patients and nine used night bending brace. Mid-thoracic curves (53%) was the most frequent deformity. Maximum curve at presentation was on average 30 ± 9 degrees, in-brace curve angle was 16 ± 8 degrees, and in-brace correction was 58 ± 24 percent. Patients were braced an average of 4.6 ± 1.9 years. 61/91 (67%) went on to posterior spinal fusion at 13.3 ± 2.1 (range 9.3–20.9) years and curve magnitude of 61 ± 12 degrees. Of those that underwent surgery, 49/55 (86%) progressed > 10°, 6/55 (11%) stabilized within 10°, and 0/55 (0%) improved > 10° with brace wear. No children underwent growth-friendly posterior instrumentation. Of the 28 who did not have surgical correction, 3 (11%) progressed > 10°, 13/28 (46%) stabilized within 10°, and 12/28 (43%) improved > 10° with brace wear.

          Conclusions

          This large series of JIS patients with bracing followed to skeletal maturity with long-term follow-up. Surgery was avoided in 33% of children with minimal to no progression, and no child underwent posterior growth-friendly constructs. Risk factors of needing surgery were noncompliance and larger curves at presentation.

          Related collections

          Most cited references25

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          2016 SOSORT guidelines: orthopaedic and rehabilitation treatment of idiopathic scoliosis during growth

          Background The International Scientific Society on Scoliosis Orthopaedic and Rehabilitation Treatment (SOSORT) produced its first guidelines in 2005 and renewed them in 2011. Recently published high-quality clinical trials on the effect of conservative treatment approaches (braces and exercises) for idiopathic scoliosis prompted us to update the last guidelines’ version. The objective was to align the guidelines with the new scientific evidence to assure faster knowledge transfer into clinical practice of conservative treatment for idiopathic scoliosis (CTIS). Methods Physicians, researchers and allied health practitioners working in the area of CTIS were involved in the development of the 2016 guidelines. Multiple literature reviews reviewing the evidence on CTIS (assessment, bracing, physiotherapy, physiotherapeutic scoliosis-specific exercises (PSSE) and other CTIS) were conducted. Documents, recommendations and practical approach flow charts were developed using a Delphi procedure. The process was completed with the Consensus Session held during the first combined SOSORT/IRSSD Meeting held in Banff, Canada, in May 2016. Results The contents of the new 2016 guidelines include the following: background on idiopathic scoliosis, description of CTIS approaches for various populations with flow-charts for clinical practice, as well as literature reviews and recommendations on assessment, bracing, PSSE and other CTIS. The present guidelines include a total of 68 recommendations divided into following topics: bracing (n = 25), PSSE to prevent scoliosis progression during growth (n = 12), PSSE during brace treatment and surgical therapy (n = 6), other conservative treatments (n = 2), respiratory function and exercises (n = 3), general sport activities (n = 6); and assessment (n = 14). According to the agreed strength and level of evidence rating scale, there were 2 recommendations on bracing and 1 recommendation on PSSE that reached level of recommendation “I” and level of evidence “II”. Three recommendations reached strength of recommendation A based on the level of evidence I (2 for bracing and one for assessment); 39 recommendations reached strength of recommendation B (20 for bracing, 13 for PSSE, and 6 for assessment).The number of paper for each level of evidence for each treatment is shown in Table 8. Conclusion The 2016 SOSORT guidelines were developed based on the current evidence on CTIS. Over the last 5 years, high-quality evidence has started to emerge, particularly in the areas of efficacy of bracing (one large multicentre trial) and PSSE (three single-centre randomized controlled trials). Several grade A recommendations were presented. Despite the growing high-quality evidence, the heterogeneity of the study protocols limits generalizability of the recommendations. There is a need for standardization of research methods of conservative treatment effectiveness, as recognized by SOSORT and the Scoliosis Research Society (SRS) non-operative management Committee. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1186/s13013-017-0145-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Standardization of criteria for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis brace studies: SRS Committee on Bracing and Nonoperative Management.

            Literature review. To establish consistent parameters for future adolescent idiopathic scoliosis bracing studies so that valid and reliable comparisons can be made. Current bracing literature lacks consistency for both inclusion criteria and the definitions of brace effectiveness. A total of 32 brace treatment studies and the current bracing in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis proposal were analyzed to: (1) determine inclusion criteria that will best identify those patients most at risk for progression, (2) determine the most appropriate definitions for bracing effectiveness, and (3) identify additional variables that would provide valuable information. Early brace studies lacked clarity in their inclusion criteria. In more recent studies, inclusion criteria have narrowed considerably to include primarily those patients most at risk for curve progression who may benefit from the use of a brace. Brace effectiveness was usually defined by various degrees of curve progression at maturity. Less frequently, it was defined by the resultant curve magnitude at maturity, whether or not surgical intervention was needed, or if there was change to another brace. Optimal inclusion criteria for future adolescent idiopathic scoliosis brace studies consist of: age is 10 years or older when brace is prescribed, Risser 0-2, primary curve angles 25 degrees -40 degrees , no prior treatment, and, if female, either premenarchal or less than 1 year postmenarchal. Assessment of brace effectiveness should include: (1) the percentage of patients who have or =6 degrees progression at maturity, (2) the percentage of patients with curves exceeding 45 degrees at maturity and the percentage who have had surgery recommended/undertaken, and (3) 2-year follow-up beyond maturity to determine the percentage of patients who subsequently undergo surgery. All patients, regardless of subjective reports on compliance, should be included in the results (intent to treat). Every study should provide results stratified by curve type and size grouping.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              Prognosis in idiopathic scoliosis.

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Amanda.whitaker@shrinenet.org , Atwhitaker@ucdavis.edu
                Journal
                Spine Deform
                Spine Deform
                Spine Deformity
                Springer International Publishing (Cham )
                2212-134X
                2212-1358
                19 July 2022
                19 July 2022
                2022
                : 10
                : 6
                : 1349-1358
                Affiliations
                [1 ]GRID grid.415852.f, ISNI 0000 0004 0449 5792, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, , Shriners Hospital for Children Northern California, ; 2425 Stockton Blvd, Sacramento, CA 95817 USA
                [2 ]GRID grid.27860.3b, ISNI 0000 0004 1936 9684, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, , University of California Davis, ; 4680 Y St, Sacramento, CA 95817 USA
                [3 ]GRID grid.2515.3, ISNI 0000 0004 0378 8438, Department of Orthopedic Surgery, , Boston Children’s Hospital, ; 300 Longwood Ave HU 221, Boston, MA 02115 USA
                [4 ]GRID grid.415629.d, ISNI 0000 0004 0418 9947, Department of Orthopedic Surgery, , Rainbow Babies and Children’s Hospital, ; 11100 Euclid Ave, Cleveland, OH 44106 USA
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3360-2609
                Article
                544
                10.1007/s43390-022-00544-2
                9579105
                35852786
                34ff42a0-2e59-454e-869b-bb0b3e78fc94
                © The Author(s) 2022

                Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.

                History
                : 13 July 2021
                : 11 June 2022
                Categories
                Case Series
                Custom metadata
                © Scoliosis Research Society 2022

                juvenile idiopathic scoliosis,scoliosis,bracing,non-operative treatment scoliosis,spinal fusion

                Comments

                Comment on this article