Volume 4 Supplement 2

6th International Conference on Conservative Management of Spinal Deformities

Open Access

A new RSC brace design to treat single long thoracic scoliosis. Comparison of the in-brace correction in two groups treated with the new and the classical models

Scoliosis20094(Suppl 2):O46

DOI: 10.1186/1748-7161-4-S2-O46

Published: 14 December 2009

Purpose of the study

The purpose of this study was to compare two different scoliosis brace designs in the treatment of a particular curve pattern.

Background

The Chêneau brace is considered one of the standards in the treatment of juvenile and adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. The RSC brace, a Chêneau derivate, uses a specific clinical and radiological classification in order to define the most effective principles of correction. (Figure 1)

Figure 1

Methods

In this case control study, 11 patients with long thoracic curves (imbalanced three-curve pattern or A1 from the Rigo classification) were treated with a specifically designed RSC brace called "three curves brace with open pelvis." These 11 patients were compared to a control group of 10 patients with the same age and curve magnitude, treated with a classical RSC brace for a three-curve scoliosis pattern. Patients with a combined upper thoracic structural curve were not included in any of the groups. The mean age was 10.5 years, mean Cobb angle was 29.5°, and mean axial rotation was 15°. The compared values were the in-brace correction of the Cobb angle and the axial rotation.

Results

The in-brace correction of the Cobb angle was 76.7% in the study group compared to 43.3% in the control group (p < .005). The in-brace correction of the axial rotation was 55.9% in the study group compared to 29.9% in the control group.

Conclusion

In-brace correction of the Cobb angle and axial rotation can be improved in patients with long thoracic curves treated with a recently described brace design ("three curves brace with open pelvis") in comparison with the classic RSC model for this curve pattern.

Authors’ Affiliations

(1)
Institut E. Salvá

Copyright

© Rigo and Gallo; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. 2009

This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd.

Advertisement