Correlation between axial trunk rotation angle and Cobb angle in different ages, genders, and types of idiopathic scoliosis patients

doi:10.12307/2021.201

Abstract

Abstract: BACKGROUND: At present, the measurement of axial trunk rotation angle is widely used to screen scoliosis. Whether this method is suitable for all types of scoliosis is still uncertain.
OBJECTIVE: To study the correlation between axial trunk rotation angle and Cobb angle in different ages, genders, and types of idiopathic scoliosis patients, and provide theoretical basis for screening of idiopathic scoliosis.
METHODS: Totally 203 idiopathic scoliosis patients aged from 4 to 18 years old were measured in Cobb angle and axial trunk rotation angle. According the age, gender and type, 203 subjects were divided into different groups, and the correlation between Cobb angle and axial trunk rotation angle was calculated in each group.
RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: (1) There was a moderate correlation between axial trunk rotation angle and Cobb angle in 203 patients with idiopathic scoliosis (r=0.581, P=0.000). (2) According to age, there was no correlation between Cobb angle and axial trunk rotation angle in 4-9 years old idiopathic scoliosis patients (r=0.516, P=0.155). There was a moderate correlation between the two angles in patients aged 10-18 years (r=0.455, P=0.000). (3) According to type, there was a strong correlation between the axial trunk rotation angle and Cobb angle in patients with type I single curve (r=0.739), a moderate correlation between the two angles in patients with type II double curve (r=0.431), and a weak correlation between the two angles in patients with type III triple curve (r=0.399). The correlation decreased between axial trunk rotation angle and Cobb angle with the increase of the number of side bends. (4) According to gender, the correlation between Cobb angle and axial trunk rotation angle was higher in male patients (r=0.601) than that in female patients (r=0.598).

Key words: diopathic scoliosis, Cobb angle, axial trunk rotation angle, influencing factors, age, PUMC classification

CLC Number:

Yuan Wangshu, Chen Lixia, Shen Jianxiong, Yu Keyi. Correlation between axial trunk rotation angle and Cobb angle in different ages, genders, and types of idiopathic scoliosis patients[J]. Chinese Journal of Tissue Engineering Research, 2021, 25(27): 4386-4389.

Figures/Tables 2

References

[1] KANE WJ. Scoliosis prevalence: a call for a statement of terms. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1977;(126):43-46.
[2] KAHANOVITZ N, SNOW B, PINTER I. The comparative results of psychologic testing in scoliosis patients treated with electrical stimulation or bracing. Spine. 1984;(9):442-444.
[3] PAYNE III WK, OGILVIE JW, RESNICK MD, et al. Doesscoliosis have a psychological impact and does gender make a difference? Spine. 1997; (22):1380-1381.
[4] UPASANI VV, CALTOUM C, PETCHARAPORN M, et al. Adolescent idiopathic scoliosis patients report increased pain at five years compared with two years after surgical treatment. Spine. 2008;(33): 1107-1112.
[5] DANIELSSON AJ, NACHEMSON AL. Back pain and function 22 years after bracetreatment for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: a case–control study-part I.Spine. 2003;(28):2078-2085.
[6] DANIELSSON AJ, NACHEMSON AL. Back pain and function 23 years after fusion for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: a case–control study-part II. Spine. 2003;(28):E373-383.
[7] SATO T, HIRANO T, ITO T, et al. Back pain in adolescents with idiopathic scoliosis: epidemiological study for 43,630 pupils in Niigata City, Japan. Eur Spine J. 2011;(20):274-279.
[8] COELHO DM, BONAGAMBA GH, OLIVEIRA AS. Scoliometer measurements of patients with idiopathic scoliosis. Braz J Phys Ther. 2013;17(2):179-184.
[9] YILMAZ H, ZATERI C, OZKAN AK, et al. Prevalence of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis in Turkey: an epidemiological study. Spine J. 2020; 20(6):947-955.
[10] ZHUANG Q, QIU G, LI Q,et al. Modified PUMC classification for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Spine J. 2019;19(9):1518-1528.
[11] ASHER MA, BURTON DC. Adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: natural history and long term treatment effects. Scoliosis. 2006;(1):2-10.
[12] BUNNELL W. Selective screening for scoliosis. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2005;(434):40-45.
[13] FONG DY, LEE CF, CHEUNG KM, et al. A meta-analysis of the clinical effectiveness of school scoliosis screening. Spine. 2010;35(10):1061-1071.
[14] FAZAL M, EDGAR M. Detection of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Acta Orthop Belg. 2006;(72):184-186.
[15] THILAGARATNAM S. School-based screening for scoliosis: is it cost-effective? Singapore Med J. 2007;48(11):1012-1017.
[16] DEURLOO JA, VERKERK PH.To screen or not to screen for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis? A review of the literature. Public Health. 2015; 129(9):1267-1272.
[17] SAPKAS G, PAPAGELOPOULOS PJ, KATEROS K, et al. Prediction of Cobb angle in idiopathic adolescent scoliosis. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2003;(411):32-39.
[18] SAPKAS G, PAPAGELOPOULOS PJ, KATEROS K, et al. Prediction of Cobb Angle in Idiopathic Adolescent Scoliosis. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2003;(477):32-37.
[19] NEGRINI S, DONZELLI S, AULISA AG, et al. 2016 SOSORT guidelines: orthopaedic and rehabilitation treatment of idiopathic scoliosis during growth. Scoliosis Spinal Disord. 2018;13:3.
[20] ANDERSON SM. Spinal curves and scoliosis. Radiol Technol. 2007;79(1): 44-65.
[21] STIRLING AJ, HOWEL D, MILLNER PA, et al. Late-onset idiopathic scoliosis in children six to fourteen years old. A cross-sectional prevalence study. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1996;(78):1330-1338.
[22] YANG JL, ZHANG K, FAN HW, et al. Development and validation of deep learning algorithms for scoliosis screening using back images. Commun Biol. 2019;2:390.