ReviewOrthopaedic surgery2026
Multidimensional Management of Degenerative Scoliosis: A Comprehensive Narrative Review Integrating Diagnostic Assessment, Surgical Decision-Making, and Patient-Centered Outcomes.
Review in Orthopaedic surgery, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Degenerative scoliosis (DS) is a common spinal deformity in aging populations and an important contributor to low back pain, neurological symptoms, and functional decline. Unlike adolescent idiopathic scoliosis, DS develops in a previously non-scoliotic spine through progressive asymmetric degeneration of the intervertebral disks, facet joints, and supporting spinal structures. Despite its growing clinical burden, management remains heterogeneous, with decision-making often fragmented across radiographic assessment, treatment planning, and postoperative outcome evaluation. Building on previous reviews of DS, this article provides a structured clinical update that organizes contemporary evidence across diagnostic assessment, individualized treatment selection, perioperative risk optimization, and patient-centered outcomes. A narrative literature review was conducted to evaluate current concepts in DS diagnosis, risk stratification, treatment strategies, and patient-centered outcomes. Relevant literature from major biomedical databases was identified and qualitatively synthesized according to clinical relevance. Current evidence supports a comprehensive assessment of DS that integrates deformity morphology, spinopelvic alignment, segmental degeneration, neurological status, bone quality, and patient-specific risk factors. Beyond coronal Cobb angle measurement, advanced imaging and alignment parameters may provide complementary information for phenotyping and treatment planning. The literature increasingly supports individualized treatment selection based on deformity severity, sagittal imbalance, physiological reserve, neurological status, and functional goals, with options ranging from nonoperative care to minimally invasive or more extensive reconstructive procedures. Surgical planning may also incorporate alignment objectives, biomechanical considerations, complication risk, frailty, and patient-reported outcomes. DS management is evolving from deformity correction-centered strategies toward a multidimensional, patient-centered paradigm. This narrative review synthesizes current evidence across diagnostic evaluation, individualized treatment selection, surgical planning, and outcome assessment while recognizing that many management strategies remain supported by heterogeneous evidence and require patient-specific consideration. Future research is needed to refine predictive models, personalized alignment strategies, and emerging technology-assisted approaches.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.