IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0126380.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Could CCI or FBCI Fully Eliminate the Impact of Curve Flexibility When Evaluating the Surgery Outcome for Thoracic Curve Idiopathic Scoliosis Patient? A Retrospective Study

Author

Listed:
  • Changwei Yang
  • Xiaofei Sun
  • Chao Li
  • Haijian Ni
  • Xiaodong Zhu
  • Shichang Yang
  • Ming Li

Abstract

Purpose: To clarify if CCI or FBCI could fully eliminate the influence of curve flexibility on the coronal correction rate. Methods: We reviewed medical record of all thoracic curve AIS cases undergoing posterior spinal fusion with all pedicle screw systems from June 2011 to July 2013. Radiographical data was collected and calculated. Student t test, Pearson correlation analysis and linear regression analysis were used to analyze the data. Results: 60 were included in this study. The mean age was 14.7y (10-18y) with 10 males (17%) and 50 females (83%). The average Risser sign was 2.7. The mean thoracic Cobb angle before operation was 51.9°. The mean bending Cobb angle was 27.6° and the mean fulcrum bending Cobb angle was 17.4°. The mean Cobb angle at 2 week after surgery was 16.3°. The Pearson correlation coefficient r between CCI and BFR was -0.856(P

Suggested Citation

  • Changwei Yang & Xiaofei Sun & Chao Li & Haijian Ni & Xiaodong Zhu & Shichang Yang & Ming Li, 2015. "Could CCI or FBCI Fully Eliminate the Impact of Curve Flexibility When Evaluating the Surgery Outcome for Thoracic Curve Idiopathic Scoliosis Patient? A Retrospective Study," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(5), pages 1-9, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0126380
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0126380
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0126380
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0126380&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0126380?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0126380. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.