Über Degenerative Skoliose

The prevalence of degenerative scoliosis remains notably high among adults and is primarily attributed to degenerative changes affecting the spine, commonly associated with disc degeneration.

This form of degenerative scoliosis typically emerges in individuals aged 40 and above, with a higher occurrence in women due to factors like bone density and hormonal changes linked to menopause.

While some degree of spinal degeneration is a natural part of aging, the cumulative impact of specific lifestyle choices can either accelerate or decelerate the rate of spinal deterioration. Factors such as carrying excess weight, maintaining chronic poor posture, incorrectly lifting heavy objects on a regular basis, and leading a sedentary lifestyle can contribute to this degenerative process.

Contrary to the common perception of scoliosis as a condition primarily affecting children and adolescents, the actual incidence of scoliosis in adolescents is estimated to be around 2 to 4%. In contrast, a study examining the prevalence of scoliosis in healthy adults aged over 60 revealed a much higher rate, reaching 68%

Characteristics and Indications of Degenerative Scoliosis

The onset of pain in degenerative scoliosis is gradual and does not manifest suddenly. Instead, it progressively intensifies over time, typically correlating with physical activity. Initial discomfort may present as a dull ache or stiffness, predominantly located in the lower back or, less frequently, in the mid-back.

Morning exacerbates pain symptoms, peaking early in the day and improving as one becomes more active. However, pain can resurface later in the day or following strenuous activities. Sitting often provides relief compared to standing or walking, as it alleviates pressure on the facet joints responsible for generating pain.

Postural changes may become apparent due to advancing curvature and spinal degeneration, leading to uneven shoulders and/or hips, resulting in a decrease in height.

It’s crucial to note that the spinal curves associated with degenerative scoliosis are typically not the direct cause of symptoms. Both the curvature and symptoms are outcomes of spinal degeneration. Consequently, treatment primarily addresses the degeneration, and the progression of curves is often slow, not always necessitating correction to alleviate symptoms.

Diagnostic Procedures for Degenerative Scoliosis

The diagnostic process for degenerative scoliosis commences with a comprehensive medical history and physical examination. The examining physician will delve into specific details regarding the nature, location, and influencing factors of pain. Subsequent observations of the backbone, shoulders, and hips during various positions, such as standing straight or bending, contribute to the clinical assessment.

Augmenting the clinical evaluation, diagnostic procedures like X-ray utilize electromagnetic radiation to project bone images onto film, revealing the extent of spinal curvature and overall alignment. Magnetic Resonance (MR) Imaging, employing a magnet and radio waves, generates images providing insights into spinal discs, the spinal cord, and spinal nerves, aiding in comprehensive diagnostic evaluation and, if necessary, surgical planning.

Degenerative Scoliosis Treatment

The management of degenerative scoliosis is contingent on various factors.

Nonoperative interventions, such as physical therapy, exercises focusing on strengthening and flexibility, or pain management strategies, may be viable options for certain patients.

When degenerative scoliosis leads to spinal stenosis, surgical intervention might be necessary. Spinal stenosis involves the narrowing of the spinal canal, exerting pressure on the spinal cord. Typically caused by the formation of bone spurs (excessive bone growth), the condition may require a laminectomy. During this procedure, the surgeon removes the laminae, the bone covering the spinal canal, creating space for the nerve roots to alleviate pressure and restore proper functionality. In some instances, a spinal fusion may be performed to ensure post-surgery stability of the spinal column. This involves the placement of a bone graft that eventually fuses with existing bone, promoting spinal integrity.

Forethought’s Technical Advantages in Degenerative Scoliosis Screening

Forethought Portable Version:

Innovative smart light sensing technology: Using advanced smart light sensing technology, it can dynamically capture small angular velocity changes and use MEMS sensors to achieve this.

Accurate terrain scanning technology: Collects optimal terrain data based on operator speed, improving screening accuracy.

Multi-level and multi-spatial information processing: Utilize the complementary and optimal combination of multi-level and multi-spatial information for data processing to improve the screening effect.

Forethought Portable Version Ⅱ:

No radiation measurement: No radiation measurement is performed to reduce radiation exposure to those being screened.

Three-dimensional report assists diagnosis: Provides three-dimensional report to assist doctors in making more accurate diagnosis.

Simultaneous acquisition of anteroposterior and lateral data: It can acquire anteroposterior and lateral data at the same time, improving the comprehensiveness and comprehensiveness of screening.

Forethought Professional Version Ⅱ:

Radiation-Free Testing: Radiation-free testing is available for unlimited tracking, follow-up and treatment adjustments.

Spine Examination and Cobb Measurement: Supports Spine Examination and Cobb Measurement for a more comprehensive assessment of spinal health.

Forethought Spine Whale:

Radiation-free dynamic detection: Dynamically detect changes in spinal morphology through radiation-free technology to prevent the progression of scoliosis.

Referenzen

• [1] Weinstein SL, Dolan LA, Cheng JC, et al. "Adolescent idiopathic scoliosis". Lancet. 2008;371(9623):1527-1537. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(08)60658-3.
• [2] Schwab FJ, Dubey A, Gamez L, et al. “Adult scoliosis: Prevalence, SF-36, and nutritional parameters in an elderly population.” Spine. 2005;30(9):1082-1085. doi: 10.1097/01.brs.0000160842.48820.9a.
• [3] Ploumis A, Transfeldt EE, Gilbert TJ, et al. “Degenerative lumbar scoliosis: radiographic correlation of lateral rotatory olisthesis with neural canal dimensions.” Spine. 2006;31(22):2353-2358. doi: 10.1097/01.brs.0000240770.59288.8e.
• [4] Sinaki M, Itoi E, Rogers JW, et al. “Correlation of back extensor strength with thoracic kyphosis and lumbar lordosis in elderly women.” Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 1996;75(5):370-374. doi: 10.1097/00002060-199609000-00011.
• [5] Glassman SD, Berven S, Kostuik J, et al. “Scoliosis Research Society Instrument Validation Study: A Multicenter Assessment of Surgical Outcomes in Idiopathic Scoliosis.” Spine. 2005;30(6):699-702. doi: 10.1097/01.brs.0000157447.56975.3e.
• [6] Kebaish KM, Neubauer PR, Voros GD, et al. “Surgical treatment of adult scoliosis with low-dose instrumentation: Analysis of clinical and radiographic results in 49 patients.” Spine. 2002;27(14):1615-1621. doi: 10.1097/00007632-200207150-00014.
• [7] Aebi M. “The adult scoliosis.” Eur Spine J. 2005;14(10):925-948. doi: 10.1007/s00586-005-1053-9.
• [8] Cheung KM, Zhang YG, Lu DS, et al. “MRI for characterization of mild scoliosis in elderly people.” Spine. 2003;28(20):2313-2319. doi: 10.1097/01.BRS.0000084643.78221.7D.
• [9] Bridwell KH, Glassman S, Horton W, et al. “Does treatment (nonoperative and operative) improve the two-year outcome in patients with adult symptomatic lumbar scoliosis?” Spine. 2009;34(20):2171-2178. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181aa3a9d.
• [10] Hu SS. “Surgical indications and options for lumbar degenerative disease.” Spine. 2005;30(16 Suppl)
• . doi: 10.1097/01.brs.0000169921.90030.38.
• [11] Kotwicki T, Negrini S, Grivas TB, et al. “Methodology of evaluation of scoliosis, back deformities and posture.” Scoliosis. 2009;4:26. doi: 10.1186/1748-7161-4-26.
• [12] Schwab F, Patel A, Ungar B, et al. “Adult scoliosis: Prevalence, SF-36, and nutritional parameters in an elderly population.” Spine. 2005;30(9):1082-1085. doi: 10.1097/01.brs.0000160842.48820.9a.
• [13] Bettany-Saltikov J, Weiss HR, Chockalingam N, et al. “Surgical versus non-surgical interventions in people with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis.” Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015;2015(4). doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD010663.pub2.
• [14] Asher MA, Burton DC. “Adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: natural history and long term treatment effects.” Scoliosis. 2006;1:2. doi: 10.1186/1748-7161-1-2.
• [15] Ohrt-Nissen S, Dahl B, Gehrchen M. “Surgical treatment of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: 2-year postoperative radiographic and clinical outcome in 125 consecutive patients.” Eur Spine J. 2016;25(10):3362-3368. doi: 10.1007/s00586-016-4541-7.