Aims. To systematically evaluate whether bracing can effectively achieve curve regression in patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS), and to identify any predictors of curve regression after bracing. Methods. Two independent reviewers performed a comprehensive literature search in PubMed, Ovid, Web of Science, Scopus, and Cochrane Library to obtain all published information about the effectiveness of bracing in achieving curve regression in AIS patients. Search terms included “brace treatment” or “bracing,” “idiopathic scoliosis,” and “curve regression” or “curve reduction.” Inclusion criteria were studies recruiting patients with AIS undergoing brace treatment and one of the study outcomes must be curve regression or reduction, defined as > 5° reduction in coronal Cobb angle of a major curve upon bracing completion. Exclusion criteria were studies including non-AIS patients, studies not reporting p-value or confidence interval, animal studies, case reports, case series, and systematic reviews. The GRADE approach to assessing quality of evidence was used to evaluate each publication. Results. After abstract and full-text screening, 205 out of 216 articles were excluded. The 11 included studies all reported occurrence of curve regression among AIS patients who were braced. Regression rate ranged from 16.7% to 100%. We found evidence that bracing is effective in achieving curve regression among compliant AIS patients eligible for bracing, i.e. curves of 25° to 40°. A similar effect was also found in patients with major curve sizes ranging from 40° to 60° when combined with scoliosis-specific exercises. There was also evidence showing that a low apical vertebral body height ratio, in-brace correction, smaller pre-brace Cobb angle, and daily pattern of brace-wear compliance predict curve regression after bracing. Conclusion. Bracing provides a corrective effect on scoliotic curves of AIS patients to achieve curve regression, given there is high compliance rate and the incorporation of exercises. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2024;106-B(3):286–292

Aims. Spinal fusion remains the gold standard in the treatment of idiopathic scoliosis. However, anterior vertebral body tethering (AVBT) is gaining widespread interest, despite the limited data on its efficacy. The aim of our study was to determine the clinical efficacy of AVBT in skeletally immature patients with idiopathic scoliosis. Methods. All consecutive skeletally immature patients with idiopathic scoliosis treated with AVBT enrolled in a longitudinal, multicentre, prospective database between 2013 and 2016 were analyzed. All patients were treated by one of two surgeons working at two independent centres. Data were collected prospectively in a multicentre database and supplemented retrospectively where necessary. Patients with a minimum follow-up of two years were included in the analysis. Clinical success was set a priori as a major coronal Cobb angle of < 35° at the most recent follow-up. Results. A total of 57 patients were included in the study. Their mean age was 12.7 years (SD 1.5; 8.2 to 16.7), with 95% being female. The mean preoperative Sanders score and Risser grade was 3.3 (SD 1.2), and 0.05 (0 to 3), respectively. The majority were thoracic tethers (96.5%) and the mean follow-up was 40.4 months (SD 9.3). The mean preoperative major curve of 51° (SD 10.9°; 31° to 81°) was significantly improved to a mean of 24.6° (SD 11.8°; 0° to 57°) at the first postoperative visit (45.6% (SD 17.6%; 7% to 107%); p < 0.001)) with further significant correction to a mean of 16.3° (SD 12.8°; -12 to 55; p < 0.001) at one year and a significant correction to a mean of 23° (SD 15.4°; -18° to 57°) at the final follow-up (42.9% (-16% to 147%); p < 0.001). Clinical success was achieved in 44 patients (77%). Most patients reached skeletal maturity, with a mean Risser score of 4.3 (SD 1.02), at final follow-up. The complication rate was 28.1% with a 15.8% rate of unplanned revision procedures. Conclusion. AVBT is associated with satisfactory correction of deformity and an acceptable complication rate when used in skeletally immature patients with idiopathic scoliosis. Improved patient selection and better implant technology may improve the 15.8% rate of revision surgery in these patients. Further scrutiny of the true effectiveness and long-term risks of this technique remains critical. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2020;102-B(12):1703–1708

Aims. The aim of this study was to review the current evidence surrounding curve type and morphology on curve progression risk in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS). Methods. A comprehensive search was conducted by two independent reviewers on PubMed, Embase, Medline, and Web of Science to obtain all published information on morphological predictors of AIS progression. Search items included ‘adolescent idiopathic scoliosis’, ‘progression’, and ‘imaging’. The inclusion and exclusion criteria were carefully defined. Risk of bias of studies was assessed with the Quality in Prognostic Studies tool, and level of evidence for each predictor was rated with the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) approach. In all, 6,286 publications were identified with 3,598 being subjected to secondary scrutiny. Ultimately, 26 publications (25 datasets) were included in this review. Results. For unbraced patients, high and moderate evidence was found for Cobb angle and curve type as predictors, respectively. Initial Cobb angle > 25° and thoracic curves were predictive of curve progression. For braced patients, flexibility < 28% and limited in-brace correction were factors predictive of progression with high and moderate evidence, respectively. Thoracic curves, high apical vertebral rotation, large rib vertebra angle difference, small rib vertebra angle on the convex side, and low pelvic tilt had weak evidence as predictors of curve progression. Conclusion. For curve progression, strong and consistent evidence is found for Cobb angle, curve type, flexibility, and correction rate. Cobb angle > 25° and flexibility < 28% are found to be important thresholds to guide clinical prognostication. Despite the low evidence, apical vertebral rotation, rib morphology, and pelvic tilt may be promising factors. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2022;104-B(4):424–432

Aims. The aim of this study was to assess the ability of morphological spinal parameters to predict the outcome of bracing in patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) and to establish a novel supine correction index (SCI) for guiding bracing treatment. Methods. Patients with AIS to be treated by bracing were prospectively recruited between December 2016 and 2018, and were followed until brace removal. In all, 207 patients with a mean age at recruitment of 12.8 years (SD 1.2) were enrolled. Cobb angles, supine flexibility, and the rate of in-brace correction were measured and used to predict curve progression at the end of follow-up. The SCI was defined as the ratio between correction rate and flexibility. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was carried out to assess the optimal thresholds for flexibility, correction rate, and SCI in predicting a higher risk of progression, defined by a change in Cobb angle of ≥ 5° or the need for surgery. Results. The baseline Cobb angles were similar (p = 0.374) in patients whose curves progressed (32.7° (SD 10.7)) and in those whose curves remained stable (31.4° (SD 6.1)). High supine flexibility (odds ratio (OR) 0.947 (95% CI 0.910 to 0.984); p = 0.006) and correction rate (OR 0.926 (95% CI 0.890 to 0.964); p < 0.001) predicted a lower incidence of progression after adjusting for Cobb angle, Risser sign, curve type, menarche status, distal radius and ulna grading, and brace compliance. ROC curve analysis identified a cut-off of 18.1% for flexibility (sensitivity 0.682, specificity 0.704) and a cut-off of 28.8% for correction rate (sensitivity 0.773, specificity 0.691) in predicting a lower risk of curve progression. A SCI of greater than 1.21 predicted a lower risk of progression (OR 0.4 (95% CI 0.251 to 0.955); sensitivity 0.583, specificity 0.591; p = 0.036). Conclusion. A higher supine flexibility (18.1%) and correction rate (28.8%), and a SCI of greater than 1.21 predicted a lower risk of progression. These novel parameters can be used as a guide to optimize the outcome of bracing. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2022;104-B(4):495–503