Exploring radiation-free scoliosis monitoring: systematic review and meta-analysis of non-ionizing methods.
AI interpretation is pending for this paper.
Open original publication →What the AI sees
Not AI summarized yet.
Research significance
Pending deeper interpretation.
Source abstract
BACKGROUND: Idiopathic scoliosis is a three-dimensional spinal deformity that typically develops during childhood or adolescence but may affect individuals across the lifespan. Regular monitoring is often necessary to detect progression and assess treatment effectiveness. Radiography remains the clinical gold standard; however, repeated ionizing radiation exposure is associated with increased cancer risks, highlighting the need for reliable, non-invasive, and radiation-free assessment methods. This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated the diagnostic accuracy and criterion validity of emerging radiation-free scoliosis monitoring techniques compared to radiographic standards. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search across six databases (Cochrane, EMBASE, IEEE Xplore, PUBMED, Scopus, Web of Science) identified 56 eligible studies involving 4,774 patients diagnosed with idiopathic scoliosis (median number of patients per study: 38; range: 5 to 952, mean patient age: 15.2 years, female-to-male ratio: 3:1). Criterion validity was assessed by pooling Pearson correlation coefficients between radiographic and non-ionizing measurements. Measurement accuracy was assessed by pooling their mean absolute differences in Cobb angles. Additionally, sensitivity and specificity for detecting deformity progression were assessed. Statistical analyses employed multilevel linear mixed-effects models, introducing moderators to explain study heterogeneity. RESULTS: Ultrasonography demonstrated the highest overall validity, consistently correlating strongly (r≈0.9) with radiographic Cobb angles. Surface topography also showed robust correlation (r > 0.8), although evidence remains insufficient for patients with higher body mass indices or more severe spinal curvatures for both methods. Magnetic resonance imaging exhibited a very strong correlation (r = 0.93) with radiographic measurements; however, correlation varied significantly depending on patient positioning. Upright MRI provided more consistent results compared to supine positioning. CONCLUSIONS: Ultrasonography and surface topography represent promising radiation-free alternatives that could significantly reduce radiographic assessment frequency, minimizing radiation exposure, particularly in suitable patient groups. While MRI also demonstrates excellent validity, its broader clinical applicability remains constrained by substantial costs, limited availability, and extended examination durations. Although these non-ionizing modalities are not yet viable replacements for routine radiography, their demonstrated validity and accuracy supports their potential as complementary technologies, particularly for screening or supplementary monitoring of scoliosis.