Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress 2023 EHA Congress 2023 ASCO Annual Meeting
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

A round-up of the ONWARDS phase 3 clinical trials evaluating the novel weekly insulin icodec in people with diabetes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
European Spine Journal
Published in: European Spine Journal 10/2016

01-10-2016 | Original Article

Effectiveness of braces designed using computer-aided design and manufacturing (CAD/CAM) and finite element simulation compared to CAD/CAM only for the conservative treatment of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: a prospective randomized controlled trial

Authors: N. Cobetto, C. E. Aubin, S. Parent, J. Clin, S. Barchi, I. Turgeon, Hubert Labelle

Published in: European Spine Journal | Issue 10/2016

Login to get access

Abstract

Purpose

Clinical assessment of immediate in-brace effect of braces designed using CAD/CAM and FEM vs. only CAD/CAM for conservative treatment of AIS, using a randomized blinded and controlled study design.

Methods

Forty AIS patients were prospectively recruited and randomized into two groups. For 19 patients (control group), the brace was designed using a scan of patient’s torso and a conventional CAD/CAM approach (CtrlBrace). For the 21 other patients (test group), the brace was additionally designed using finite element modeling (FEM) and 3D reconstructions of spine, rib cage and pelvis (NewBrace). The NewBrace design was simulated and iteratively optimized to maximize the correction and minimize the contact surface and material.

Results

Both groups had comparable age, sex, weight, height, curve type and severity. Scoliosis Research Society standardized criteria for bracing were followed. Average Cobb angle prior to bracing was 27° and 28° for main thoracic (MT) and lumbar (L) curves, respectively, for the control group, while it was 33° and 28° for the test group. CtrlBraces reduced MT and L curves by 8° (29 %) and 10° (40 %), respectively, compared to 14° (43 %) and 13° (46 %) for NewBraces, which were simulated with a difference inferior to 5°. NewBraces were 50 % thinner and had 20 % less covering surface than CtrlBraces.

Conclusion

Braces designed with CAD/CAM and 3D FEM simulation were more efficient and lighter than standard CAD/CAM TLSO’s at first immediate in-brace evaluation. These results suggest that long-term effect of bracing in AIS may be improved using this new platform for brace fabrication.

Trial registration

NCT02285621.
Literature
1.
Nachemson AL, Peterson LE (1995) Effectiveness of treatment with brace in girls who have adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. A prospective, controlled study based on data from the Brace Study of the Scoliosis Research Society. J Bone Joint Surg 77:815–822PubMed
2.
3.
Castro F (2003) Adolescent idiopathic scoliosis, bracing, and the Hueter-Volkmann principle. Spine 3:182–185
4.
Negrini S, Atanasio S, Fusco C, Zaina F (2009) Effectiveness of complete conservative treatment for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (bracing and exercises) based on SOSORT management criteria: results according to the SRS criteria for bracing studies-SOSORT Award 2009 Winner. Scoliosis 4:19CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
5.
Negrini S, Aulisa AG, Aulisa L et al (2012) 2011 SOSORT guidelines: orthopaedic and rehabilitation treatment of idiopathic scoliosis during growth. Scoliosis 7:1–35CrossRef
6.
7.
Landauer F, Wimmer C, Behensky H (2003) Estimating the final outcome of brace treatment for idiopathic thoracic scoliosis at 6-month follow-up. Pediatri Rehabil 6:201–207CrossRef
8.
Clin J, Aubin CE, Sangole A, Labelle H, Parent S (2010) Correlation between immediate in-brace correction and biomechanical effectiveness of brace treatment in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Spine 35(18):1706–1713CrossRefPubMed
9.
Nault M, Parent S, Phan P, Roy-Beaudry M, Labelle H, Rivard M (2010) A modified Risser grading system predicts the curve acceleration phase of female adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. J Bone Joint Surg Am 92:1073–1081CrossRefPubMed
10.
Lusini M, Donzelli S, Minnella S, Zaina F, Negrini S (2010) Brace treatment is effective in idiopathic scoliosis over 45°: an observational prospective cohort controlled study. Spine J 14(9):1951–1956CrossRef
11.
Brox JI, Lange JE, Gunderson RB, Steen H (2012) Good brace compliance reduced curve progression and surgical rates in patients with idiopathic scoliosis. Eur Spine J 21:1957–1963CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
12.
Aulisa GO, Giordano M, Falciglia F et al (2014) Correlation between compliance and brace treatment in juvenile and adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: SOSORT 2014 award winner. Scoliosis 9:6CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
13.
Wong MS (2011) Computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacture (CAD/CAM) system for construction of spinal orthosis for patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Physiother Theory Pract 27(1):74–79CrossRefPubMed
14.
Wong MS (2005) A comparison of treatment effectiveness between the CAD/CAM method and the manual method for managing adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Prosthet Orthot Int 29(1):105–111CrossRefPubMed
15.
Desbiens-Blais F, Clin J, Parent S, Labelle H, Aubin CE (2012) New brace design combining CAD/CAM and biomechanical simulation for the treatment of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Clin Biomech 27:999–1005CrossRef
16.
Cobetto N, Aubin CE, Clin J, Le May S, Desbiens-Blais F, Labelle H, Parent S (2014) Braces optimized with computer-assisted design and simulations are lighter, comfortable and more efficient than plaster-casted braces for the treatment of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Spine Deform 2(4):276–284CrossRef
17.
Pazos V, Cheriet F, Dansereau J, Ronsky J, Zernicke RF, Labelle H (2007) Reliability of trunk shape measurements based on 3-D surface reconstructions. Eur Spine J 16:1882–1891CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
18.
Raux S, Kohler R, Garin C, Cunin V, Abelin-Genevois K (2014) Tridimensinal trunk surface acquisition for brace manufacturing in idiopathic scoliosis. Eur Spine J 4:S419–S423CrossRef
19.
Aubin C, Descrimes JL, Dansereau J et al (1995) Geometrical modeling of the spine and the thorax for the biomechanical analysis of scoliotic deformities using the finite element method. Ann Chir 49:749–761PubMed
20.
Gignac D, Aubin CE, Dansereau J, Labelle H (2000) Optimization method for 3D bracing correction of scoliosis using a finite element model. Eur Spine J 9:185–190CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
21.
Wynarsky GT, Schultz AB (1991) Optimization of skeletal configuration: studies of scoliosis correction biomechanics. J Biomech 24(8):721–732CrossRefPubMed
22.
Perie D, Aubin CE, Lacroix M, Lafon Y, Labelle H (2004) Biomechanical modelling of orthotic treatment of the scoliotic spine including a detailed representation of the brace-torso interface. Med Biol Eng Compu 42:339–344CrossRef
23.
Perie D, Aubin CE, Petit Y, Labelle H, Dansereau J (2004) Personalized biomechanical simulations of orthotic treatment in idiopathic scoliosis. Clin Biomech 19:190–195CrossRef
24.
Clin J, Aubin CE, Labelle H (2007) Virtual prototyping of a brace design for the correction of scoliotic deformities. Med Biol Eng Compu 45:467–473CrossRef
25.
Clin J, Aubin CE, Parent S, Labelle H (2011) Biomechanical modeling of brace treatment of scoliosis: effects of gravitational loads. Med Biol Eng Compu 49:743–753CrossRef
26.
Richards BS, Bernstein RM, D’Amato CR, Thompson GH (2005) Standardization of criteria for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis brace studies: SRS Committee on Bracing and Nonoperative Management. Spine 30(18):2068–2075CrossRefPubMed
27.
Humbert L, de Guise JA, Aubert B, Godbout B, Skalli W (2009) 3D reconstruction of the spine from biplanar X-rays using parametric models based on transversal and longitudinal inferences. Med Eng Phys 31(6):681–687CrossRefPubMed
28.
Aubin CE, Dansereau J, De Guise JA, Labelle H (1996) A study of biomechanical coupling between spine and rib cage in the treatment by orthosis of scoliosis. Ann Chir 50:641–650PubMed
29.
Howard A, Wright JG, Hedden D (1998) A comparative study of TLSO, Charleston and Milwaukee braces for idiopathic scoliosis. Spine 23:2404–2411CrossRefPubMed
30.
Zhang M, Mak A (1999) In vivo friction properties of human skin. Prosthet Orthot Int 23:135–141PubMed
31.
Morrissy RT, Goldsmith GS, Hall EC, Kehl D, Cowie GH (1990) Measurement of the Cobb angle on radiographs of patients who have scoliosis. Evaluation of intrinsic error. J Bone Joint Surg Am 72(3):320–327PubMed
32.
Carman DL, Browne RH, Birch JG (1990) Measurement of scoliosis and kyphosis radiographs. Intraobserver and interobserver variation. J Bone Joint Surg Am 72(3):328–333PubMed
33.
Morton A, Riddle R, Buchanan R, Katz D, Birch J (2008) Accuracy in the prediction and estimation of adherence to bracewear before and during treatment of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. J Pediatr Orthop 28(3):336–341CrossRefPubMed
34.
Donzelli S, Zaina F, Negrini S (2015) Compliance monitor for scoliosis braces in clinical practice. J Child Orthop (epub ahead of print)
35.
36.
Katz DE, Durrani AA (2001) Factors that influence outcome in bracing large curves in patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 26(21):2354–2361CrossRef
37.
Sattout A, Clin J, Cobetto N, Labelle H, Aubin CE (20165 Biomechanical assessment of Providence nighttime brace for the treatment of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Spine Deform (accepted 24 Dec 2015)
38.
Lebel DE, Al-Aubaidi Z, Shin EJ, Howard A, Zeller R (2013) Three dimensional analysis of brace biomechanical efficacy for patients with AIS. Eur Spine J 22(11):2445–2448CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
39.
Weiss HR, Kleban A (2015) Development of CAD/CAM based brace models for the treatment of patients with scoliosis-classification based approach versus finite element modelling. Asian Spine J 9(5):661–667CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
40.
Clin J, Aubin CE, Parent S, Labelle H (2010) A biomechanical study of the Charleston brace for the treatment of scoliosis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 35(19):E940–E947CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Effectiveness of braces designed using computer-aided design and manufacturing (CAD/CAM) and finite element simulation compared to CAD/CAM only for the conservative treatment of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: a prospective randomized controlled trial
Authors
N. Cobetto
C. E. Aubin
S. Parent
J. Clin
S. Barchi
I. Turgeon
Hubert Labelle
Publication date
01-10-2016
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in
European Spine Journal / Issue 10/2016
Print ISSN: 0940-6719
Electronic ISSN: 1432-0932
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-016-4434-3

Other articles of this Issue 10/2016

European Spine Journal 10/2016 Go to the issue

Original Article

Antimicrobial prophylaxis to prevent surgical site infection in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis patients undergoing posterior spinal fusion: 2 doses versus antibiotics till drain removal

Original Article

Adults with idiopathic scoliosis improve disability after motor and cognitive rehabilitation: results of a randomised controlled trial

Original Article

Rib-vertebral angle measurements predict brace treatment outcome in Risser grade 0 and premenarchal girls with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis

Original Article

Sagittal spino-pelvic adjustment in severe Lenke 1 hypokyphotic adolescent idiopathic scoliosis patients

Original Article

Effect of surgical correction of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis on the quality of life: a prospective study with a minimum 5-year follow-up

Original Article

Sagittal alignment of the cervical spine in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: a comparative study of 42 adolescents with idiopathic scoliosis and 24 normal adolescents