The Role of Sole Lift in Treating Pediatric Idiopathic Scoliosis with Mild Thoracolumbar/Lumbar Curve

Abstract

Objective: Lower limb discrepancy (LLD) was frequently observed in patients with idiopathic scoliosis (IS), potentially associated with etiopathogenesis. Although sole lifts had been proposed as a conservative treatment for IS, evidence supporting their efficacy was limited. This study aimed to assess the effects of sole lift intervention on pediatric patients with mild IS, specifically focusing on thoracolumbar/lumbar (TL/L) curvature.

Methods: Twenty patients, with an average age of 12.3 ± 3.1 years and presenting mild TL/L curve (15.6° ± 6.2°), were selected from a pool of 267 pediatric IS patients in the outpatient of our spine center from February 2023 to August 2023. Inclusion criteria comprised a main TL/L curve ranging between 10° and 40°, the lower limb positioned at the convexity of the main curve, and LLD of less than 2 cm; individuals requiring bracing or surgical intervention were excluded. Custom sole lifts were used to address the shorter lower limb with the objective of leveling the pelvis. Radiographic evaluations were conducted both before and after intervention using standing full spine posteroanterior radiographs and full leg length radiographs. Statistical analysis was undertaken to evaluate curve correction and its associations with other influencing factors.

Results: The mean structural and functional LLD were 7.1 ± 4.5 mm and 7.1 ± 4.1 mm, respectively. Among the 20 patients, four exhibited structural LLD greater than 10 mm. The average follow-up duration was 6.4 ± 1.9 months (range: 3–8 months). Following sole lift intervention (7.0 ± 3.0 mm), a significant reduction was observed in the TL/L curve compared to the pre-sole lifting measurements (15.6° ± 6.2° vs. 12.1° ± 7.2°, p < 0.001), as well as a notable decrease in the thoracic curve (12.2° ± 4.0° vs. 8.6° ± 6.3°, p = 0.064). Nine patients experienced a significant curve reduction of ≥5°, while eight showed a reduction between 0° and 5°; however, two patients exhibited no change in curve magnitude. Furthermore, the correction rate of the TL/L curve correlated significantly with functional LLD (r = –0.484, p = 0.030) and pelvic obliquity (r = –0.556, p = 0.011), highlighting the active pelvic compensation in maintaining balance between the spine and lower limbs. Conversely, no significant correlation was observed between curve correction and structural LLD (p > 0.05). Additionally, even after adjusting for other influencing factors, the TL/L Cobb angle remained significantly different between pre- and post-sole lifting (p = 0.037).

Conclusion: This study confirmed the effectiveness of sole lift intervention in correcting TL/L and thoracic curves among the mild IS children with a main TL/L curve, providing a supplementary conservative treatment option for patients with the lower limb at the convexity of the main curve. Moreover, our findings underscored the active compensation of the lower limbs and the pelvis in the etiopathogenesis of IS, highlighting the importance of considering their influence in treatment strategies.

Keywords

conservative treatment / Idiopathic scoliosis / lower limb discrepancy / pelvic / sole lift

References

[1] Ogilvie JW. What’s important: moving beyond “idiopathic” in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2020; 102(3): 269–270.

[2] Weinstein SL, Dolan LA. The evidence base for the prognosis and treatment of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: the 2015 Orthopaedic Research and Education Foundation clinical research award. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2015; 97(22): 1899–1903.

[3] Burwell RG, Dangerfield PH, Freeman BJ, et al. Etiologic theories of idiopathic scoliosis: the breaking of bilateral symmetry in relation to left-right asymmetry of internal organs, right thoracic adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) and vertebrate evolution. Stud Health Technol Inform. 2006; 123: 385–390.

[4] Burwell RG, Dangerfield PH, Moulton A, Grivas TB, Cheng JC. Whither the etiopathogenesis (and scoliogeny) of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis? Incorporating presentations on scoliogeny at the 2012 IRSSD and SRS meetings. Scoliosis. 2013; 8(1): 4.

[5] Burwell RG, Aujla RK, Freeman BJ, Dangerfield PH, Cole AA, Kirby AS, et al. Patterns of extra-spinal left-right skeletal asymmetries and proximo-distal disproportion in adolescent girls with lower spine scoliosis: ilio-femoral length asymmetry & bilateral tibial/foot length disproportion. Stud Health Technol Inform. 2006; 123: 101–108.

[6] Hresko MT. Clinical practice. Idiopathic scoliosis in adolescents. N Engl J Med. 2013; 368(9): 834–841.

[7] Weinstein SL, Dolan LA, Wright JG, Dobbs MB. Effects of bracing in adolescents with idiopathic scoliosis. N Engl J Med. 2013; 369(16): 1512–1521.

[8] Weinstein SL, Dolan LA, Cheng JC, Danielsson A, Morcuende JA. Adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Lancet. 2008; 371(9623): 1527–1537.

[9] Gordon JE, Davis LE. Leg length discrepancy: the natural history (and what do we really know). J Pediatr Orthop. 2019; 39(6, Suppl 1): S10–S13.

[10] Raczkowski JW, Daniszewska B, Zolynski K. Functional scoliosis caused by leg length discrepancy. Arch Med Sci. 2010; 6(3): 393–398.

[11] Bhave A, Paley D, Herzenberg JE. Improvement in gait parameters after lengthening for the treatment of limb-length discrepancy. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1999; 81(4): 529–534.

[12] Wynes J, Schupp A. Assessment of pediatric limb length inequality. Clin Podiatr Med Surg. 2022; 39(1): 113–127.

[13] Papaioannou T, Stokes I, Kenwright J. Scoliosis associated with limb-length inequality. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1982; 64(1): 59–62.

[14] Knutson GA. Anatomic and functional leg-length inequality: a review and recommendation for clinical decision-making. Part II. The functional or unloaded leg-length asymmetry. Chiropr Osteopat. 2005; 13: 12.

[15] Gibson PH, Papaioannou T, Kenwright J. The influence on the spine of leg-length discrepancy after femoral fracture. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1983; 65(5): 584–587.

[16] Young RS, Andrew PD, Cummings GS. Effect of simulating leg length inequality on pelvic torsion and trunk mobility. Gait Posture. 2000; 11(3): 217–223.

[17] Zabjek KF, Leroux MA, Coillard C, Martinez X, Griffet J, Simard G, et al. Acute postural adaptations induced by a shoe lift in idiopathic scoliosis patients. Eur Spine J. 2001; 10(2): 107–113.

[18] Lee JG, Yun YC, Jo WJ, Seog TY, Yoon YS. Correlation of radiographic and patient assessment of spine following correction of nonstructural component in juvenile idiopathic scoliosis. Ann Rehabil Med. 2018; 42(6): 863–871.

[19] Park SM, Ahn SH, Lee AY, Park IS, Cho YW. Raster-stereographic evaluation of the effects of biomechanical foot orthoses in patients with scoliosis. J Phys Ther Sci. 2016; 28(7): 1968–1971.

[20] Juhl JH, Ippolito Cremin TM, Russell G. Prevalence of frontal plane pelvic postural asymmetry—part 1. J Am Osteopath Assoc. 2004; 104(10): 411–421.

[21] Sheha ED, Steinhaus ME, Kim HJ, Cunningham ME, Fragomen AT, Rozbruch SR. Leg-length discrepancy, functional scoliosis, and low Back pain. JBJS Rev. 2018; 6(8): e6.

[22] Sekiya T, Aota Y, Yamada K, Kaneko K, Ide M, Saito T. Evaluation of functional and structural leg length discrepancy in patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis using the EOS imaging system: a prospective comparative study. Scoliosis Spinal Disord. 2018; 13: 7.

[23] Karkenny AJ, Magee LC, Landrum MR, Anari JB, Spiegel D, Baldwin K. The variability of pelvic obliquity measurements in patients with neuromuscular scoliosis. JB JS Open Access. 2021; 6(1): e20.00143.

[24] Schwender JD, Denis F. Coronal plane imbalance in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis with left lumbar curves exceeding 40 degrees: the role of the lumbosacral hemicurve. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2000; 25(18): 2358–2363.

[25] Richards BS, Bernstein RM, D’Amato CR, Thompson GH. Standardization of criteria for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis brace studies: SRS Committee on bracing and nonoperative management. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2005; 30(18): 2068–2075.

[26] Lonstein JE, Carlson JM. The prediction of curve progression in untreated idiopathic scoliosis during growth. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1984; 66(7): 1061–1071.

[27] Soucacos PN, Zacharis K, Soultanis K, Gelalis J, Xenakis T, Beris AE. Risk factors for idiopathic scoliosis: review of a 6-year prospective study. Orthopedics. 2000; 23(8): 833–838.

[28] Hoikka V, Ylikoski M, Tallroth K. Leg-length inequality has poor correlation with lumbar scoliosis. A radiological study of 100 patients with chronic low-back pain. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 1989; 108(3): 173–175.

[29] Korbel K, Kozinoga M, Stolinski L, Kotwicki T. Scoliosis Research Society (SRS) criteria and Society of Scoliosis Orthopaedic and Rehabilitation Treatment (SOSORT) 2008 guidelines in non-operative treatment of idiopathic scoliosis. Pol Orthop Traumatol. 2014; 79: 118–122.

[30] Carragee EJ, Lehman RA Jr. Spinal bracing in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. N Engl J Med. 2013; 369(16): 1558–1560.

[31] D’Amico M, Roncoletta P, Di Felice F, Porto D, Bellomo R, Saggini R. Leg length discrepancy in scoliotic patients. Stud Health Technol Inform. 2012; 176: 146–150.

[32] Qiu XS, Wang ZW, Qiu Y, Wang WJ, Mao SH, Zhu ZZ, et al. Preoperative pelvic axial rotation: a possible predictor for postoperative coronal decompensation in thoracolumbar/lumbar adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Eur Spine J. 2013; 22(6): 1264–1272.

[33] Wang ZW, Wang WJ, Sun MH, Liu Z, Zhu ZZ, Zhu F, et al. Characteristics of the pelvic axial rotation in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: a comparison between major thoracic curve and major thoracolumbar/lumbar curve. Spine J. 2014; 14(9): 1873–1878.

RIGHTS & PERMISSIONS

2024 The Author(s). Orthopaedic Surgery published by Tianjin Hospital and John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd.