What imaging does my AIS patient need? A multi-group survey of provider preferences.

Abstract

Introduction: Adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) is a common diagnosis managed by pediatric orthopedic surgeons with nonoperative radiographic monitoring representing a cornerstone of treatment. Differences in practices and techniques for obtaining radiographic studies contribute to variation, cost of care, and hamper data aggregation. We surveyed several large organizations dedicated to children's orthopedics or scoliosis care to obtain a consensus for radiographic evaluation of AIS.

Methods: A REDCap-based survey was developed across four institutions and beta-tested by staff and fellows from a single institution. The finalized survey was distributed to members of POSNA, PSSG, and SOSORT, and shared on social media. Participants were asked to rank the importance of various datapoints in radiographic assessment of the spinal deformity, skeletal maturity, and study indications during initial, subsequent, preoperative, and final office visits for AIS. Response rate for the overall group was 26%.

Results: Cobb angle was considered the most important (> 94%) radiographic index across all time points. For positioning, 46% of respondents favored arms bent touching clavicles as the ideal positioning for X-rays, and another 24% favored arms down with palms forward (Table 2). The majority of respondents obtain lateral X-rays at the first visit (99%) and at the preoperative visit (70%). At the preoperative visit, sagittal contour (86%), apex location (85%), and Lenke classification (73%) were considered important factors to record. Flexibility studies are primarily obtained at the preoperative visit (89%) and 81% of respondents prefer bending films as the flexibility technique of choice. Regarding measures of skeletal maturity, Sanders bone age was considered to be the most important by over 70% of respondents across initial, subsequent, preoperative and brace wean visits (Fig. 2). MRIs were obtained routinely by 34% of respondents and only when the patient had a concerning symptom or finding for 67% of respondents.

Conclusions: Despite large variations in radiographic examination of AIS, large areas of agreement were found. It is important to establish standards for positioning patients, evaluating skeletal maturity, and obtaining assessments including lateral views, flexibility studies, and advanced imaging. Establishing common practices for radiographic evaluation of AIS will allow for less variation in care and for critical questions to be answered through registry formation and large multicenter data collection.

Significance: This study establishes current practitioner opinion on the radiographic evaluation of the AIS patient. Minimum data sets are useful for data aggregation and answering research questions in the face of data variability.

Level of evidence: Level V.