Search

This review presents the state of the art according to the current evidence on nonoperative treatment for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis, focusing on bracing. The definition of braces for the treatment of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis and a short history are provided. The analysis includes biomechanics, types, existing classifications, indications for treatment, time of brace wear and weaning, adherence, three-dimensional modeling, use of ultrasound imaging for bracing, management of treatment, issue of immediate in-brace correction, and documentation of the outcomes usually assessed for brace treatment, including the quality-of-life issues. According to the current evidence, there are two randomized control trials in favor of bracing. There are insufficient data on the superiority of one brace over another, although it is possible to classify and grade braces for efficacy from nonrigid to rigid and very rigid. Nevertheless, there is consensus on patients' management on the need for teamwork focusing on adherence to treatment, acceptability, and family and patient involvement., (Copyright © 2022 International Society for Prosthetics Orthotics.)

Purpose: Studies have shown that bracing is an effective treatment for patients with idiopathic scoliosis. According to the current classification, almost all braces fall in the thoracolumbosacral orthosis (TLSO) category. Consequently, the generalization of scientific results is either impossible or misleading. This study aims to produce a classification of the brace types., Methods: Four scientific societies (SOSORT, SRS, ISPO, and POSNA) invited all their members to be part of the study. Six level 1 experts developed the initial classifications. At a consensus meeting with 26 other experts and societies' officials, thematic analysis and general discussion allowed to define the classification (minimum 80% agreement). The classification was applied to the braces published in the literature and officially approved by the 4 scientific societies and by ESPRM., Results: The classification is based on the following classificatory items: anatomy (CTLSO, TLSO, LSO), rigidity (very rigid, rigid, elastic), primary corrective plane (frontal, sagittal, transverse, frontal & sagittal, frontal & transverse, sagittal & transverse, three-dimensional), construction-valves (monocot, bivalve, multisegmented), construction-closure (dorsal, lateral, ventral), and primary action (bending, detorsion, elongation, movement, push-up, three points). The experts developed a definition for each item and were able to classify the 15 published braces into nine groups., Conclusion: The classification is based on the best current expertise (the lowest level of evidence). Experts recognize that this is the first edition and will change with future understanding and research. The broad application of this classification could have value for brace research, education, clinical practice, and growth in this field., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

[This retracts the article DOI: 10.1186/s13013-016-0102-y.].

Background: The International Scientific Society on Scoliosis Orthopaedic and Rehabilitation Treatment (SOSORT) produced its first guidelines in 2005 and renewed them in 2011. Recently published high-quality clinical trials on the effect of conservative treatment approaches (braces and exercises) for idiopathic scoliosis prompted us to update the last guidelines' version. The objective was to align the guidelines with the new scientific evidence to assure faster knowledge transfer into clinical practice of conservative treatment for idiopathic scoliosis (CTIS)., Methods: Physicians, researchers and allied health practitioners working in the area of CTIS were involved in the development of the 2016 guidelines. Multiple literature reviews reviewing the evidence on CTIS (assessment, bracing, physiotherapy, physiotherapeutic scoliosis-specific exercises (PSSE) and other CTIS) were conducted. Documents, recommendations and practical approach flow charts were developed using a Delphi procedure. The process was completed with the Consensus Session held during the first combined SOSORT/IRSSD Meeting held in Banff, Canada, in May 2016., Results: The contents of the new 2016 guidelines include the following: background on idiopathic scoliosis, description of CTIS approaches for various populations with flow-charts for clinical practice, as well as literature reviews and recommendations on assessment, bracing, PSSE and other CTIS. The present guidelines include a total of 68 recommendations divided into following topics: bracing ( n  = 25), PSSE to prevent scoliosis progression during growth ( n  = 12), PSSE during brace treatment and surgical therapy ( n  = 6), other conservative treatments ( n  = 2), respiratory function and exercises ( n  = 3), general sport activities ( n  = 6); and assessment ( n  = 14). According to the agreed strength and level of evidence rating scale, there were 2 recommendations on bracing and 1 recommendation on PSSE that reached level of recommendation "I" and level of evidence "II". Three recommendations reached strength of recommendation A based on the level of evidence I (2 for bracing and one for assessment); 39 recommendations reached strength of recommendation B (20 for bracing, 13 for PSSE, and 6 for assessment).The number of paper for each level of evidence for each treatment is shown in Table 8., Conclusion: The 2016 SOSORT guidelines were developed based on the current evidence on CTIS. Over the last 5 years, high-quality evidence has started to emerge, particularly in the areas of efficacy of bracing (one large multicentre trial) and PSSE (three single-centre randomized controlled trials). Several grade A recommendations were presented. Despite the growing high-quality evidence, the heterogeneity of the study protocols limits generalizability of the recommendations. There is a need for standardization of research methods of conservative treatment effectiveness, as recognized by SOSORT and the Scoliosis Research Society (SRS) non-operative management Committee., Competing Interests: Not applicable.Not applicable.All Commission Members are physicians, orthothists and physiotherapists who earn from their own work. The conflict of interests declared by the authors are as follows: ✓ Stefano Negrini has a stock of ISICO (Italian Scientific Spine Institute), Italy. ✓ Manuel Rigo is advisor of Ortholutions, Germany. ✓ Michele Romano has a stock of ISICO (Italian Scientific Spine Institute), Italy. ✓ James H. Wynne is an employee of Boston Brace Corp., USA: ✓ No other conflict of interests have been declared.Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Background: The current increase in types of scoliosis braces defined by a surname or a town makes scientific classification essential. Currently, it is a challenge to compare braces and specify the indications of each brace. A precise definition of the characteristics of current braces is needed. As such, the International Society for Scoliosis Orthopedic and Rehabilitation Treatment (SOSORT) mandated the Brace Classification Study Group (BCSG) to address the pertinent terminology and brace classification. As such, the following study represents the first part of the SOSORT consensus in addressing the definitions and providing a visual atlas of bracing., Methods: After a short introduction on the braces, the aim of the BCSG is described and its policies/general consideration are outlined. The BSCG endeavor embraces the very important SOSORT - Scoliosis Research Society cooperation, the history of which is also briefly narrated. This report contains contributions from a multidisciplinary panel of 17 professionals who are part of the BCSG. The BCSG introduced several pertinent domains to characterize bracing systems. The domains are defined to allow for analysis of each brace system., Results: A first approach to brace classification based on some of these proposed domains is presented. The BCSG has reached a consensus on 139 terms related to bracing and has provided over 120 figures to serve as an atlas for educational purposes., Conclusions: This is the first clinical terminology tool for bracing related to scoliosis based on the current scientific evidence and formal multidisciplinary consensus. A visual atlas of various brace types is also provided.

Background: The conservative orthopaedic treatment of adult scoliosis is very disappointing. In a series of 144 patients; only 25 % (33 cases) were monitored at 2 years of treatment. (Papadopoulos 2013). Thereby the literature typically focuses on a small number of patients, which limits the usefulness and relevance of its results. The brace effect on pain has been systematically described, but there is no publication on the effect of treatment on the Cobb angle and main clinical parameters., Methods: From a prospective database started in 1998, we selected all 158 consecutive patients effectively treated conservatively with the Lyon management treatment and controlled five years after brace fitting. Lyon management includes a lordosing bivalve polyethylene overlapping brace in association with specific physiotherapy. The brace can either be short with anterior support under the chest or long with sterno-clavicular support when there is a high thoracic kyphosis., Results: 1. For the rate of scoliosis controlled after 5 years, the follow-up was 24 % of the 661 patients accepting the treatment. Pain is almost the main reason for the medical consultation, generally correlating with an increase of the scoliotic angulation. 2. The descriptive data can be superimposed on general group with age ( m =56 years, SD=13) but initial Cobb angulation is significantly higher ( m =40°, SD=17). Ratio Female/Male=0.91. Generally, the scoliosis is stabilized at ( m =39.74 °, SD=19.40), 8 years after the beginning of the treatment. 38 improvements of more than 5°= 24 %; 88 stable = 56 %; 32 worsening of more than 5° = 20 % The rib hump is improved of by 3 mm, (modelling effect of the brace). The occipital axis is improved by more than 6 mm. But the T1 plumb line distance is worsening by 7 mm (most braces are short without sterno-clavicular support)., Conclusions: For the first time, the number of records and follow up after 8 years allows to study the radiological progression of adult scoliosis rigid bracing. Stability or improvement of more than 5° in 80 % of cases justify rigid bracing in adults. The accentuation of the thoracic kyphosis is the only negative element and a modified ARTbrace will soon be used.

Background: Despite the frequency of adult scoliosis, very few publications concern the conservative orthopaedic treatments. The indications have not been defined to date. The experience of a department specialized in rigid bracing allows us to consolidate and clarify diagnosis and indications as well., Methods: Individual observational prospective cohort study from a database started in 1998, with selection of all 739 adult scoliosis patients for which conservative orthopaedic treatment has been proposed to, even in case of drop-out. Scoliosis treated during adolescence and monitored in adulthood are included if a new brace is prescribed. A first descriptive study of the main parameters was performed: gender, age, Cobb angle. A tentative classification according to aetiology, age and angulation is proposed., Results: Descriptive Data:The Ratio Female/Male is 88 %, the mean age: 56.97 ± 15.82, the mean Cobb angle: 35.58 ± 17.35. The rate of non-adherent patients not wearing the brace is 17 % (but the plaster cast before bracing was routinely proposed at the time). All patients can be grouped into five diagnoses, all statistically different, according to the age and the initial Cobb angle:Rotatory dislocation: 361 cases, age: 59.73 ± 13.52 ( p  = 0.05), (Cobb 39.08 ± 16.59 ( p  = 0.02)*Instability and disc disease: 150 cases, age: 46.03 ± 15.49 ( p  = 0.00)*, Cobb: 25.29 ± 12.29 ( p  = 0.00)*Camptocormia: 68 cases, age: 69.78 ± 12.19 ( p  = 0.00)*), Cobb: 38.09 ± 14.23 ( p  = 0.25)Kyphosis TL or T: 62 cases, age: 60.73 ± 15.51 ( p  = 0.07), Cobb: 43.34 ± (21.48 ( p  = 0.00)*Disabling pain: 33 cases, age: 48.36 ± 13.73 ( p  = 0.02)*, Cobb: 36.45 ± 25.21 ( p  = 0.78) Treatment after surgery and in the context of a lumbar stenosis and spondylolisthesis are independent groups. Despite the wide variety of etiologies, nearly 2/3 of patients have a discal pathology like rotatory dislocation and disc instability. For these patients a short brace can be used. Other patients usually have high kyphotic pathology as Kyphosis or camptocormia. They need a long brace., Conclusions: The wide variety of adult scoliosis makes any objective classification difficult. This first approach is intended to specify the best indications of bracing in adulthood.The female ratio is slightly higher than that of the adolescent.The dropout rate is high and justify improvements with adaptation of bracing to adults.All proposed etiological groups are statistically significantly different.

In recent decades, there has been a call for change among all stakeholders involved in scoliosis management. Parents of children with scoliosis have complained about the so-called "wait and see" approach that far too many doctors use when evaluating children's scoliosis curves between 10° and 25°. Observation, Physiotherapy Scoliosis Specific Exercises (PSSE) and bracing for idiopathic scoliosis during growth are all therapeutic interventions accepted by the 2011 International Society on Scoliosis Orthopaedic and Rehabilitation Treatment (SOSORT). The standard features of these interventions are: 1) 3-dimension self-correction; 2) Training activities of daily living (ADL); and 3) Stabilization of the corrected posture. PSSE is part of a scoliosis care model that includes scoliosis specific education, scoliosis specific physical therapy exercises, observation or surveillance, psychological support and intervention, bracing and surgery. The model is oriented to the patient. Diagnosis and patient evaluation is essential in this model looking at a patient-oriented decision according to clinical experience, scientific evidence and patient's preference. Thus, specific exercises are not considered as an alternative to bracing or surgery but as a therapeutic intervention, which can be used alone or in combination with bracing or surgery according to individual indication. In the PSSE model it is recommended that the physical therapist work as part of a multidisciplinary team including the orthopeadic doctor, the orthotist, and the mental health care provider - all are according to the SOSORT guidelines and Scoliosis Research Society (SRS) philosophy. From clinical experiences, PSSE can temporarily stabilize progressive scoliosis curves during the secondary period of progression, more than a year after passing the peak of growth. In non-progressive scoliosis, the regular practice of PSSE could produce a temporary and significant reduction of the Cobb angle. PSSE can also produce benefits in subjects with scoliosis other than reducing the Cobb angle, like improving back asymmetry, based on 3D self-correction and stabilization of a stable 3D corrected posture, as well as the secondary muscle imbalance and related pain. In more severe cases of thoracic scoliosis, it can also improve breathing function. This paper will discuss in detail seven major scoliosis schools and their approaches to PSSE, including their bracing techniques and scientific evidence. The aim of this paper is to understand and learn about the different international treatment methods so that physical therapists can incorporate the best from each into their own practices, and in that way attempt to improve the conservative management of patients with idiopathic scoliosis. These schools are presented in the historical order in which they were developed. They include the Lyon approach from France, the Katharina Schroth Asklepios approach from Germany, the Scientific Exercise Approach to Scoliosis (SEAS) from Italy, the Barcelona Scoliosis Physical Therapy School approach (BSPTS) from Spain, the Dobomed approach from Poland, the Side Shift approach from the United Kingdom, and the Functional Individual Therapy of Scoliosis approach (FITS) from Poland.

Background: Data comparing different braces for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) are scant. The SRS criteria represent some guidelines for comparing results from different studies, but controlled studies are much more reliable. Recently, super-rigid braces have been introduced in clinical practice with the aim of replacing Risser and EDF casts. The aim of the present study is to compare the short-term radiographic results of two super-rigid braces, the ART and the SPORT (Sforzesco) brace., Methods: A group of consecutive patients with Cobb >40°, Risser 0-4, age >10 treated with the ART brace for 6 months were matched with a group of similar patients taken from a prospective database of patients treated with the Sforzesco brace. Patients were matched according to Cobb severity, pattern and localization of the curve. All patients had a full-time brace prescription (23-24 hours per day) and an indication to perform scoliosis-specific exercises and were assessed radiographically both immediately in the brace and after 6 months of treatment out of brace. Curves were analyzed according to the pattern and localization taking into consideration both the in-brace correction and the 6-month out-of-brace results., Statistical Analysis: t-test, ANOVA, linear regression, alpha set at 0.05., Results: Twenty-six patients were included in the ART brace group, and 26 in the Sforzesco brace group. At baseline, no differences were noted for gender (3 males for each group), age (14.1 ± 0.3 for ART vs 13.9 ± 0.3 for Sforzesco), ATR (11.8 ± 3.2 vs 11.5 ± 4.2 for thoracic curves and 7.8 ± 4.0 vs 7.1 ± 6.1 for lumbar/thoracolumbar), Cobb angle (44.8 ± 2 vs 45.5 ± 2 for thoracic; 43.8 ± 2 vs 46.0 ± 2 for lumbar/thoracolumbar) or Risser sign (median 2 for both groups). The in-brace correction was slightly better for the ART brace, but didn't reach statistical significance (24.3 ± 8.5 vs 28.0 ± 6.8 for thoracic; 23.7 ± 10.4 vs 29.9 ± 4.2 for lumbar/thoracolumbar). At 6 months, results were similar both for thoracic (34.4 ± 10.4 vs34.8 ± 6.8) and for lumbar/thoracolumbar (32.8 ± 10.8 vs 36.6 ± 5.2). Also, with regard to the pattern, results were similar for double major and for thoracic, while there were not enough data for single lumbar to make a comparison. No differences for ATR were found (7.8 ± 3.2 vs 8.6 ± 2.9 for thoracic; 4.3 ± 3.4 vs 4.3 ± 3.7 for lumbar/thoracolumbar)., Conclusion: These two super-rigid braces showed similar short-term results, despite the better in-brace correction for lumbar curves shown by the ART brace. According to our data, the asymmetric design showed results similar to the symmetric one. After these preliminary data, further studies are needed to check end growth results and the impact of compliance, rigidity of curve, exercise and assessing quality of life.

The publication of research in the field of conservative treatment of scoliosis is increasing after a long period of progressive decline. In 2014, three high quality and scientifically sound papers gave new strength to the conservative scoliosis approach. The efficacy of treatment over observation was demonstrated by two RCTs for bracing, and one for scoliosis-specific exercises provided by a physical therapist. It is difficult to design strong studies in this field due to the long time needed for follow up and the challenge of recruiting patients and families willing to be involved in the decision process. Nevertheless, the main methodological errors are not related to the study design but rather on the way it is performed, which very frequently affects the reliability of results. The most common errors are: selection bias, with many studies including functional rather than a true structural scoliosis; inappropriate outcome measures, utilizing parameters not related to scoliosis progression or quality of life; inappropriate follow up, reporting only immediate results and not addressing end of growth results; an incorrect interpretation of findings, with an overestimation of results; and missing the evaluation of skeletal maturity, without which results cannot be considered stable. Being aware of these errors is extremely important both for authors and for readers in order to avoid questionable practices based on inconclusive studies that could harm patients.

Background: The symmetrical Lyon brace is a brace, usually used to maintain correction after a plaster cast reduction in the Cotrel's EDF (Elongation-Derotation-Flexion) frame. The new Lyon brace or ARTbrace is an immediate corrective brace based on some of the principles of the plaster cast which are improved due to advances in CAD/CAM technology. The aim of this paper is to describe concepts of this new brace to be not only a replacement of the plaster cast, but also a definitive brace., Methods: Instead of a plaster cast, three segmental CAD/CAM moulds are made with the instantaneous full 3D raster stereography digitizer (Orten):In self axial elongationIn shift and lumbar lordosisIn shift and thoracic kyphosis A specific software (OrtenShape) makes up the overlay of the three moulds. Mould 1 is used for the pelvis and the shoulders mould 2 for the lumbar segment and mould 3 for the thoracic segment. The mathematical basis of the ARTbrace is the torso column which is a circled helicoid with horizontal circle generator. A torso column is reproduced in the opposite direction of the scoliosis. Like the plaster cast, the ARTbrace is worn for a "total time" of 24 hours 7 days a week without modifying the standard protocol of the Lyon brace reduction. The prospective controlled cohort observational study of the 225 first patients treated since May 2013 is reported below., Results: The in-brace immediate reduction is: 0.7, i.e. 40% better with the ARTbrace than with a plaster cast. The correction of flat back is 9° (from 18°.4 to 28°.5 kyphosis Cobb angle). The improved aesthetic appearance is equal for rib hump and ATR., Conclusion: This first paper is an introduction with very short results and does not prejudge the final outcome. The ARTbrace can be used not only to replace the plaster cast, but also as a definitive brace. The new segmental moulding with final detorsion is even more efficient and to this day the ARTbrace is the most effective to reduce the Cobb angle of scoliosis.

Bracing is currently the primary method for treating moderate idiopathic scoliosis (IS) during the developmental phase of growth. Following a lengthy debate, during which researchers and authors questioned the role of bracing in the treatment of IS due to inconsistent evidence, the Bracing in Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis Trial study have provided a high level of evidence to the value of bracing and may have convinced most of those who were skeptic. However, although some guidelines have been published, there remains no standard for constructing scoliosis orthoses and no standard treatment protocol. The Scoliosis Research Society criteria were established to provide a framework by which to research bracing and adolescent idiopathic scoliosis, and the Society on Scoliosis Orthopedic and Rehabilitation Treatment criteria were published to guarantee a minimum level of expertise for MDs and CPOs involved in the brace treatment. However, very few contemporary papers follow both sets of criteria, and the extensive variety of braces makes it difficult to determine if one is superior to another. The aim of this paper is to provide an overview of state-of-the-art brace treatment, highlighting commonly used braces and their history, biomechanical concept, and results, as reported in published literature. Specific focus is placed on European (i.e., Chêneau and derivatives, Dynamic Derotating, Lyon, PASB, Sforzesco, TLI, TriaC) and North American (i.e. Boston, Charleston, Milwaukee, Providence, Rosenberger, SpineCor, Wilmington) designs. Details about different building techniques are also reported, along with recently developed tools that are designed to monitor compliance.

Idiopathic scoliosis (IS) is a three-dimensional deformity of the spine and trunk. The most common form involve adolescents. The prevalence is 2-3% of the population, with 1 out of 6 patients requiring treatment of which 25% progress to surgery. Physical and rehabilitation medicine (PRM) plays a primary role in the so-called conservative treatment of adolescents with IS, since all the therapeutic tools used (exercises and braces) fall into the PRM domain. According to a Cochrane systematic review there is evidence in favor of bracing, even if it is of low quality. Recently, a controlled prospective trial including a randomised arm gave more strength to this conclusion. Another Cochrane review shows that there is evidence in favor of exercises as an adjunctive treatment, but of low quality. Three meta-analysis have been published on bracing: one shows that bracing does not reduce surgery rates, but studies with bracing plus exercises were not included and had the highest effectiveness; another shows that full time is better than part-time bracing; the last focuses on observational studies following the Scoliosis Research Society (SRS) criteria and shows that not all full time rigid bracing are the same: some have the highest effectiveness, others have less than elastic and nighttime bracing. Two very important RCTs failed in recruitment, showing that in the field of bracing for scoliosis RCTs are not accepted by the patients. Consensuses by the international Society on Scoliosis Orthopedic and Rehabilitation Treatment (SOSORT) show that there is no agreement among experts either on the best braces or on their biomechanical action, and that compliance is a matter of clinical more than patients' behavior (there is strong agreement on the management criteria to achieve best results with bracing). A systematic review of all the existing studies shows effectiveness of exercises, and that auto-correction is their main goal. A systematic review shows that there are no studies on manual treatment. The SOSORT Guidelines offer the actual standard of conservative care.

Background: The International Scientific Society on Scoliosis Orthopaedic and Rehabilitation Treatment (SOSORT), that produced its first Guidelines in 2005, felt the need to revise them and increase their scientific quality. The aim is to offer to all professionals and their patients an evidence-based updated review of the actual evidence on conservative treatment of idiopathic scoliosis (CTIS)., Methods: All types of professionals (specialty physicians, and allied health professionals) engaged in CTIS have been involved together with a methodologist and a patient representative. A review of all the relevant literature and of the existing Guidelines have been performed. Documents, recommendations, and practical approach flow charts have been developed according to a Delphi procedure. A methodological and practical review has been made, and a final Consensus Session was held during the 2011 Barcelona SOSORT Meeting., Results: The contents of the document are: methodology; generalities on idiopathic scoliosis; approach to CTIS in different patients, with practical flow-charts; literature review and recommendations on assessment, bracing, physiotherapy, Physiotherapeutic Specific Exercises (PSE) and other CTIS. Sixty-five recommendations have been given, divided in the following topics: Bracing (20 recommendations), PSE to prevent scoliosis progression during growth (8), PSE during brace treatment and surgical therapy (5), Other conservative treatments (3), Respiratory function and exercises (3), Sports activities (6), Assessment (20). No recommendations reached a Strength of Evidence level I; 2 were level II; 7 level III; and 20 level IV; through the Consensus procedure 26 reached level V and 10 level VI. The Strength of Recommendations was Grade A for 13, B for 49 and C for 3; none had grade D., Conclusion: These Guidelines have been a big effort of SOSORT to paint the actual situation of CTIS, starting from the evidence, and filling all the gray areas using a scientific method. According to results, it is possible to understand the lack of research in general on CTIS. SOSORT invites researchers to join, and clinicians to develop good research strategies to allow in the future to support or refute these recommendations according to new and stronger evidence.

: The Lyon Brace, or adjustable multi-shell brace, has been used for more than 60 years.The use and function of the Lyon Brace includes:- The utilization of one or two corrective plaster casts, which enables a true lengthening of the concave ligaments.- An oriented CAD-CAM moulding in 3D auto correction after the removal of the plaster cast.- A blueprint adapted to Lenke's classification.- A specific physiotherapy program., Background: Pierre Stagnara created the Lyon Brace in 1947. The brace has the following characteristics:- It adjusts to allow for a child's growth of up to seven centimetres and for an increase in weight of up to seven kilograms.- It is 'active' in that the rigidity of the PMM (polymetacrylate of methyl) structure stimulates the user to auto-correct. The active axial auto-correction decreases the pressures of the brace on the trunk.- It is decompressive in that the effect of extension between the two pelvic and scapular girdles decreases the pressure on the intervertebral disc allowing for more effective pushes in the other planes.- It is symmetrical making it both more aesthetically pleasing and easier to build.- It is stable at both shoulders and pelvic girdle, facilitating the intermediate 3D corrections.- It is transparent. The pressure of the shells on the skin can be directly controlled so "pads" are usually not necessary., Brace Description: Two metal bars are fixed vertically, one anterior the other posterior and all shells are attached from the bottom to the top in this order:- Two pelvic shells ensure an optimal stability of the brace.- One lumbar shell T12-L4, which can be either independent or extending, at the abdominal chondrocostal level.- One thoracic shell at the level of the thoracic convexity.- One opposite thoracic shell used as a counter push.- One shoulder balance shell on the side of the thoracic convexity., Long Term Follow Up Results: This is a retrospective study of 1,338 completed treatments checked a minimum of two years after weaning from the brace.Only 5% of the curves progressed more than 5° from the initial magnitudes. This translates to an effectiveness index of 0.95.A subset of 174 subjects who started treatment at Risser 0 was isolated. The global progressive angular mean curve was superimposed on the statistic general curve and the effectiveness index was calculated at 0.80.The Surgery rate was just 2% of the patients presenting with an initial curve below 45°., Conclusion: The Lyon Brace is the historical reference of bracing AIS. To be fully effective, it requires the patient to wear a plaster cast for at least one month and receive specific physiotherapy training. Although this is a retrospective study, the results are very positive, and clearly indicate a need for a prospective study.

Background: This report is the SOSORT Consensus Paper on Terminology for use in the treatment of conservative spinal deformities. Figures are provided and relevant literature is cited where appropriate., Methods: The Delphi method was used to reach a preliminary consensus before the meeting, where the terms that still needed further clarification were discussed., Results: A final agreement was found for all the terms, which now constitute the base of this glossary. New terms will be added after being discussed and accepted., Discussion: When only one set of terms is used for communication in a place or among a group of people, then everyone can clearly and efficiently communicate. This principle applies for any professional group. Until now, no common set of terms was available in the field of the conservative treatment of scoliosis and spinal deformities. This glossary gives a common base language to draw from to discuss data, findings and treatment.

The Lyon Brace or adjustable multi-shells brace has been used for more than 60 years. Three types of braces have been developed: Lyon thoracic brace, Lyon thoraco lumbar brace and Lyon lumbar brace. Considering the conservative orthopaedic treatment of scoliosis we outline the results of this orthosis. The management of the Lyon Brace includes: (i) The use of one or two reductive plastered brace which enable a flow of the concavity ligaments; (ii) a moulding either hand-oriented or electronic after the resection of the plastered brace; (iii) a blueprint adapted to Lenke's classification; and (iv) a specific physiotherapy. The protocol of the wearing of the orthosis depends on the initial angulation of the scoliosis. The effectivity index of 1338 scoliosis checked at least two years after the weaning of the brace, is 0.95. The effectivity index is 0.80 when the Lyon brace is put in place at Risser 0. If the angulation is globally stabilized, the rib hump is, on average, half reduced. We get the best results for lumbar scoliosis and double major. The technological progresses allow a precise use. The adjustment becomes easy during puberty growth.

The authors have reviewed 58 cases submitted to strut grafting in the concavity of the curve. There were 44 kyphoscolioses and 12 kyphoses. The average follow-up was more than two years and the average pre-operative deformity was 127 degrees. The average improvement was 38 degrees and the secondary loss was only 3 degrees. The results are analysed with regard to the surgical technique used. In some cases, posterior fixation was added and the graft was either from the tibia, the fibula or a rib. In 16 cases a secondary fracture of the graft was found. It appeared between the fourth and tenth post-operative months. During this period, reduction of the graft was seen. The graft was found to thicken later at about the eighteenth post-operative month. It is concluded that the technique is worthwhile provided it is associated with posterior internal fixation, and that an external brace is worn for at least eighteen months after operation.