Skip to main content
Top
Published in: European Spine Journal 7/2006

01-07-2006 | Original Article

Rasterstereographic analysis of axial back surface rotation in standing versus forward bending posture in idiopathic scoliosis

Authors: Lars Hackenberg, Eberhard Hierholzer, Viola Bullmann, Ulf Liljenqvist, Christian Götze

Published in: European Spine Journal | Issue 7/2006

Login to get access

Abstract

The forward bending test according to Adams and rib hump quantification by scoliometer are common clinical examination techniques in idiopathic scoliosis, although precise data about the change of axial surface rotation in forward bending posture are not available. In a pilot study the influence of leg length inequalities on the back shape of five normal subjects was clarified. Then 91 patients with idiopathic scoliosis with Cobb-angles between 20° and 82° were examined by rasterstereography, a 3D back surface analysis system. The axial back surface rotation in standing posture was compared with that in forward bending posture and additionally with a scoliometer measurement in forward bending posture. The changes of back shape in forward bending posture were correlated with the Cobb-angle, the level of the apex of the scoliotic primary curve and the age of the patient. Averaged over all patients, the back surface rotation amplitude increased from 23.1° in standing to 26.3° in forward bending posture. The standard deviation of this difference was high (6.1°). The correlation of back surface rotation amplitude in standing with that in forward bending posture was poor (R 2=0.41) as was the correlation of back surface rotation in standing posture with the scoliometer in forward bending posture measured rotation (R 2=0.35). No significant correlation could be found between the change of back shape in forward bending and the degree of deformity (R 2=0.07), likewise no correlation with the height of the apex of the scoliosis (R 2=0.005) and the age of the patient (R 2=0.001). Before forward bending test leg length inequalities have to be compensated accurately. Compared to the standing posture, forward bending changes back surface rotation. However, this change varies greatly between patients, and is independent of the type and degree of scoliosis. Furthermore remarkable differences were found between scoliometer measurement of the rib hump and rasterstereographic measurement of the vertebral rotation. Therefore the forward bending test and the identification of idiopathic scoliosis rotation by scoliometer can be markedly different compared to rasterstereographic surface measurement in the standing posture.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Adams W (1865) Lectures on the pathology and treatment of lateral and other forms of curvature of the spine. Churchill, London Adams W (1865) Lectures on the pathology and treatment of lateral and other forms of curvature of the spine. Churchill, London
2.
go back to reference Amendt LE, Ause-Ellias KL, Eybers JL, Wadsforth CT, Nielsen DH, Weinstein SL (1990) Validity and reliability testing of the Scoliometer. Phys Ther 70:108–116PubMed Amendt LE, Ause-Ellias KL, Eybers JL, Wadsforth CT, Nielsen DH, Weinstein SL (1990) Validity and reliability testing of the Scoliometer. Phys Ther 70:108–116PubMed
3.
go back to reference Bunnel WP (1984) An objective criterion for scoliosis screening. J Bone Joint Surg 66:1381–1387 Bunnel WP (1984) An objective criterion for scoliosis screening. J Bone Joint Surg 66:1381–1387
5.
go back to reference Burwell RG, Aujla RK, Kirby AS, Moulton A, Webb JK (2002) The early detection of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis in three positions using the Scoliometer and real-time ultrasound: should the prone position also be used? In: Tanguy A, Peuchot B (eds) Research into spinal deformities. IOS Press/Ohmsha, Amsterdam/Tokyo, pp 381–385 Burwell RG, Aujla RK, Kirby AS, Moulton A, Webb JK (2002) The early detection of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis in three positions using the Scoliometer and real-time ultrasound: should the prone position also be used? In: Tanguy A, Peuchot B (eds) Research into spinal deformities. IOS Press/Ohmsha, Amsterdam/Tokyo, pp 381–385
6.
go back to reference Cote P, Kreitz BG, Cassidy JD, Dzus AK, Martel J (1998) A study of the diagnostic accuracy and reliability of the scoliometer and Adam`s foreward bending test. Spine 23:796–802PubMedCrossRef Cote P, Kreitz BG, Cassidy JD, Dzus AK, Martel J (1998) A study of the diagnostic accuracy and reliability of the scoliometer and Adam`s foreward bending test. Spine 23:796–802PubMedCrossRef
7.
go back to reference Dickson RA, Weinstein SL (1999) Bracing (and screening)-yes or no? J Bone Joint Surg (Br) 81-B:193–198CrossRef Dickson RA, Weinstein SL (1999) Bracing (and screening)-yes or no? J Bone Joint Surg (Br) 81-B:193–198CrossRef
8.
go back to reference Drerup B, Hierholzer E (1992) Evaluation of frontal radiographs of scoliotic spines—Part I: Measurement of position and orientation of vertebra and assessment of clinical shape parameters. J Biomech 25:1357–1362PubMedCrossRef Drerup B, Hierholzer E (1992) Evaluation of frontal radiographs of scoliotic spines—Part I: Measurement of position and orientation of vertebra and assessment of clinical shape parameters. J Biomech 25:1357–1362PubMedCrossRef
9.
go back to reference Drerup B, Hierholzer E (1992) Evaluation of frontal radiographs of scoliotic spines—Part II: Relations between lateral deviation, lateral tilt and axial rotation of vertebrea. J Biomech 25:1443–1450PubMedCrossRef Drerup B, Hierholzer E (1992) Evaluation of frontal radiographs of scoliotic spines—Part II: Relations between lateral deviation, lateral tilt and axial rotation of vertebrea. J Biomech 25:1443–1450PubMedCrossRef
10.
go back to reference Dunn BH, Hakala MW, McGee ME (1978) Scoliosis screening. Pediatrics 61:794–797PubMed Dunn BH, Hakala MW, McGee ME (1978) Scoliosis screening. Pediatrics 61:794–797PubMed
11.
go back to reference Goldberg CJ, Kaliszer M, Moore DP, Fogarty EE, Dowling FE (2001) Surface topography, Cobb angles, and cosmetic change in scoliosis. Spine 15:E55–E63CrossRef Goldberg CJ, Kaliszer M, Moore DP, Fogarty EE, Dowling FE (2001) Surface topography, Cobb angles, and cosmetic change in scoliosis. Spine 15:E55–E63CrossRef
12.
go back to reference Götze HG (1973) Der Rotationsindex bei idiopathischen Thorakalskoliosen. Z Orthop 111:737–743 Götze HG (1973) Der Rotationsindex bei idiopathischen Thorakalskoliosen. Z Orthop 111:737–743
13.
go back to reference Grossmann TW, Mazur JM, Cummings RJ (1995) An evolution of the Adams foreward bend test and the scoliometer in a scoliosis school screening setting. J Ped Orthop 15:535–538 Grossmann TW, Mazur JM, Cummings RJ (1995) An evolution of the Adams foreward bend test and the scoliometer in a scoliosis school screening setting. J Ped Orthop 15:535–538
14.
go back to reference Hierholzer E (1993) Objektive Analyse der Rückenform von Skoliosepatienten. Gustav Fischer, Stuttgart, New York Hierholzer E (1993) Objektive Analyse der Rückenform von Skoliosepatienten. Gustav Fischer, Stuttgart, New York
15.
go back to reference Hackenberg L, Hierholzer E, Pötzl W, Götze C, Liljenqvist U (2003) Rasterstereographic back shape analysis in idiopathic scoliosis after anterior correction and fusion. Clin Biomech 18:1–8CrossRef Hackenberg L, Hierholzer E, Pötzl W, Götze C, Liljenqvist U (2003) Rasterstereographic back shape analysis in idiopathic scoliosis after anterior correction and fusion. Clin Biomech 18:1–8CrossRef
16.
go back to reference Hackenberg L, Hierholzer E, Pötzl W, Götze C, Liljenqvist U (2003) Rasterstereographic back shape analysis in idiopathic scoliosis after posterior correction and fusion. Clin Biomech 18:883–889CrossRef Hackenberg L, Hierholzer E, Pötzl W, Götze C, Liljenqvist U (2003) Rasterstereographic back shape analysis in idiopathic scoliosis after posterior correction and fusion. Clin Biomech 18:883–889CrossRef
17.
go back to reference Johnson MR, Upadhyay SS, Burwell RG, Webb JK (1987) Integrated shape imaging system (ISIS) an evaluation of its capacity to measure lateral spine curves and appraise hump dynamics on forward flexion. J Bone Joint Surg 69-B:851–852 Johnson MR, Upadhyay SS, Burwell RG, Webb JK (1987) Integrated shape imaging system (ISIS) an evaluation of its capacity to measure lateral spine curves and appraise hump dynamics on forward flexion. J Bone Joint Surg 69-B:851–852
18.
go back to reference Karachalios T, Sofianos J, Roidis N, Sapkas G, Korres D, Nikolopoulos K (1999) Ten-year follow-up evaluation of a scool screening program for scoliosis. Is the forward-bending test an accurate diagnostic criterion for the screening of scoliosis? Spine 24(22):2318–2324PubMedCrossRef Karachalios T, Sofianos J, Roidis N, Sapkas G, Korres D, Nikolopoulos K (1999) Ten-year follow-up evaluation of a scool screening program for scoliosis. Is the forward-bending test an accurate diagnostic criterion for the screening of scoliosis? Spine 24(22):2318–2324PubMedCrossRef
19.
go back to reference Lonstein JE (1977) Screening for spinal deformities in Minnesota schools. Clin Orthop 126:33–42PubMed Lonstein JE (1977) Screening for spinal deformities in Minnesota schools. Clin Orthop 126:33–42PubMed
20.
go back to reference Murell GAC, Coonrad RW, Moorman CT, Fitch RD (1993) An assesment of the reliability of the scoliometer. Spine 18:709–712CrossRef Murell GAC, Coonrad RW, Moorman CT, Fitch RD (1993) An assesment of the reliability of the scoliometer. Spine 18:709–712CrossRef
21.
go back to reference Pearsall DJ, Reid GJ, Hedden DM (1992) Comparison of three non-invasive methods for measuring scoliosis. Phys Ther 72:648–657PubMed Pearsall DJ, Reid GJ, Hedden DM (1992) Comparison of three non-invasive methods for measuring scoliosis. Phys Ther 72:648–657PubMed
22.
go back to reference Sakka SA, Wojcik A, Macindoe S, Metha MH (1995) Reproducibility and reliabilityof the quantec surface imaging system in the assessment of spinal deformity. In: D´Amico M, Merolli A, Santambrogio GC (eds) Three-dimensional analysis of spinal deformities. IOS Press/Omsha, Amsterdam/Tokyo, pp 441–445 Sakka SA, Wojcik A, Macindoe S, Metha MH (1995) Reproducibility and reliabilityof the quantec surface imaging system in the assessment of spinal deformity. In: D´Amico M, Merolli A, Santambrogio GC (eds) Three-dimensional analysis of spinal deformities. IOS Press/Omsha, Amsterdam/Tokyo, pp 441–445
23.
go back to reference Stokes IA, Moreland MS (1987) Measurement of the shape of the surface of the back in patients with idiopathic scoliosis. The standing and foreward-bending position. J Bone Joint Surg 69:203–211PubMed Stokes IA, Moreland MS (1987) Measurement of the shape of the surface of the back in patients with idiopathic scoliosis. The standing and foreward-bending position. J Bone Joint Surg 69:203–211PubMed
24.
go back to reference Torell G, Nordwall A, Nachemson A (1981) The changing pattern of scoliosis treatment due to effective screening. J Bone Joint Surg 63-A:337–341 Torell G, Nordwall A, Nachemson A (1981) The changing pattern of scoliosis treatment due to effective screening. J Bone Joint Surg 63-A:337–341
25.
go back to reference Turner-Smith AR, Harris JD, Houghton GR, Jefferson RJ (1988) A method for analysis of back shape in scoliosis. J Biomech 21:497–509PubMedCrossRef Turner-Smith AR, Harris JD, Houghton GR, Jefferson RJ (1988) A method for analysis of back shape in scoliosis. J Biomech 21:497–509PubMedCrossRef
26.
go back to reference Upadhyay SS, Burwell RG, Webb JK (1987) The use of the Scoliometer to valuate hump dynamics in relation to leg length in equality and pelvic tilt. J Bone Joint Surg 69B:851 Upadhyay SS, Burwell RG, Webb JK (1987) The use of the Scoliometer to valuate hump dynamics in relation to leg length in equality and pelvic tilt. J Bone Joint Surg 69B:851
27.
Metadata
Title
Rasterstereographic analysis of axial back surface rotation in standing versus forward bending posture in idiopathic scoliosis
Authors
Lars Hackenberg
Eberhard Hierholzer
Viola Bullmann
Ulf Liljenqvist
Christian Götze
Publication date
01-07-2006
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
European Spine Journal / Issue 7/2006
Print ISSN: 0940-6719
Electronic ISSN: 1432-0932
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-005-0057-9

Other articles of this Issue 7/2006

European Spine Journal 7/2006 Go to the issue