Are x-rays necessarys?

[flerc]

When children are growing, the curve can grow with her body, so it’s not possible to know if a height increase is accompanied by an increase in the curve or not.
But after growth is finish, the curve and the height are in an indirect proportionality, so an increment in height should to imply a decrease of the curve and vise versa. So measuring the height and making the plumb test should to be enough.. or not?

[titaniumed]

No.

A plumb line will work for checking centerline. It will not tell you what is happening inside. I had two 70 degree curves with perfect plumb and very good saggital balance.

X-rays are the best way to see what's up. Now measuring them is a different story. A collection of x-rays will help average.

I have had many x-rays through the years. Probably a few too many as Linda pointed out once.
Ed

[flerc]

No.

A plumb line will work for checking centerline. It will not tell you what is happening inside. I had two 70 degree curves with perfect plumb and very good saggital balance.

X-rays are the best way to see what's up. Now measuring them is a different story. A collection of x-rays will help average.

I have had many x-rays through the years. Probably a few too many as Linda pointed out once.
Ed

if your height is always the same, it means that if some curve increase, then other should to be decreased in the same scale. In fact I think that it should not happens very often and only in that case an x-ray would be necessary to know that a curve had increased. In other cases you should to be taller or lower (decrement or increment).
But could be that your height would be the same and you think that all is fine, but your axis turned to a side (in fact you should to be a little lower), so plumb test is necessary only to knowing that.

[dailystrength]

Also bear in mind that height increases and decreases with the day's passing, similar to a curve perhaps. I'm sure you know this . Also, I've heard others say that their height was better yet the curves were worse. So, I think it is not a reliable indicator.

[flerc]

Also bear in mind that height increases and decreases with the day's passing, similar to a curve perhaps. I'm sure you know this . Also, I've heard others say that their height was better yet the curves were worse. So, I think it is not a reliable indicator.

But the height was not measured while the x ray was taken. Much people does not know how to measure in a right way. There are an error because disk decompression in the morning, but it could be reduced measuring at he same hour. If the curve doesn't decrease, how could be height increase?

[titaniumed]

My height used to fluctuate about 3 inches before my surgeries. I agree with Christina, it is just one very small factor.

The newer x-ray machines these days put out much less radiation than those years ago. One coronal should suffice. It’s the CT scans that cause some worry. There was a thread here a few months ago that pointed out that they are equal to 440 single x-rays.
Ed

[debbei]

No.

A plumb line will work for checking centerline. It will not tell you what is happening inside. I had two 70 degree curves with perfect plumb and very good saggital balance.

X-rays are the best way to see what's up. Now measuring them is a different story. A collection of x-rays will help average.

I have had many x-rays through the years. Probably a few too many as Linda pointed out once.
Ed

My plumb line was perfect too; my body was so smart, it PERFECTLY compensated for my 66 degree Thoracic curve with a perfectly balanced 66 degree lumbar curve.

Ed's right, you can't see what's going on inside without the Xrays.

[rohrer01]

As far as your question about height goes, you have to be talking about a skeletally mature person, right? No one knows how tall an adolescent would grow to be. Therefore, the growth rate would be measured on a growth curve but still wouldn't tell you anything about progression unless the adolescent started shrinking. Then you still wouldn't know how large the curve was.

[dailystrength]

well, that makes a lot of sense!

[flerc]

Thanks rohrer01, you have reason saying this about teenagers, but my daughter has the menarche at 12 years old and at least Riser 4 and in the last x ray it seems to be closed the cartilages. Anyway is true I should to be absolutely sure about growth.

[flerc]

decompression disks

Assuming that growth is finished, I think the only reason that x rays may be needed to measure growth curve, is the subject of the disks in the morning. But that would only be relevant if decompression disks would be done in a way so that only could be grow in stature but the curve remained the same. There is some study about this? In other words:
degrees meassured in a x ray in the morning would be the same than measured more late with less stature?

[rohrer01]

flerc,
It depends on who measures me, I measure anywhere between 5' 7" and 5' 7-1/2". Usually the latter. I progressed 6* and my height didn't appear to change. How do you figure that one? They would have never known if they hadn't taken an X-ray. I can't explain it.

[flerc]

flerc,
It depends on who measures me, I measure anywhere between 5' 7" and 5' 7-1/2". Usually the latter. I progressed 6* and my height didn't appear to change.

rohrer01, I believe you, but it would be a mystery for me.
I allways measure the height, supporting the coxis and head on the wall, causing it to contact a plane perpendicular to the wall. I make two measurements: first, without stretching the back (as it should get the X-ray) and one with a good stretch of the spine. the difference is usually more than 2 cm.
I think what happens is that the two measures (height and curve), has a margin of error, which should be quite similar. So if there is nothing that can change the height (regardless decompression of the disc), unlike the curves of the spine, if those do not change, the height can not vary.
I think the X-ray also has to have a margin of error itself. The result would be obtained should be quite different if we remain in good standing in a frontal plane that if we stand at an angle. In this case, the curve could decline, perhaps even increase, I'm not sure.
May be I'm not taking something into account?

[rohrer01]

rohrer01, I believe you, but it would be a mystery for me.
I allways measure the height, supporting the coxis and head on the wall, causing it to contact a plane perpendicular to the wall. I make two measurements: first, without stretching the back (as it should get the X-ray) and one with a good stretch of the spine. the difference is usually more than 2 cm.
I think what happens is that the two measures (height and curve), has a margin of error, which should be quite similar. So if there is nothing that can change the height (regardless decompression of the disc), unlike the curves of the spine, if those do not change, the height can not vary.
I think the X-ray also has to have a margin of error itself. The result would be obtained should be quite different if we remain in good standing in a frontal plane that if we stand at an angle. In this case, the curve could decline, perhaps even increase, I'm not sure.
May be I'm not taking something into account?

I believe you are correct. Posture does matter on X-rays. At least for the "flexible" areas of the spine. There are ALWAYS margins of error for ANY measurement. But it remains a mystery how I could have progressed 6* and not shrunk, although I was measuring 5' 7". When I was 15 and my scoliosis hadn't progressed (before diagnosis) I was 5' 8-1/2". At 16 I was 5' 7-1/4". Figure what they will. This does show definite shrinkage AND margins of error both. Therefore, you need to keep getting X-rays for your dear daughter as often as the doctors recommend.

[flerc]

I believe you are correct. Posture does matter on X-rays. At least for the "flexible" areas of the spine. There are ALWAYS margins of error for ANY measurement. But it remains a mystery how I could have progressed 6* and not shrunk, although I was measuring 5' 7". When I was 15 and my scoliosis hadn't progressed (before diagnosis) I was 5' 8-1/2". At 16 I was 5' 7-1/4". Figure what they will. This does show definite shrinkage AND margins of error both. Therefore, you need to keep getting X-rays for your dear daughter as often as the doctors recommend.

Yes, Surely you are right. But it is so terrible the day of taking X-ray .. so much nervous .. It's not just the great concern about the radiation .. also is very stressful for my daughter and I think it's right about the theory Rpg emotions.
I also think is very important the unusual relationship with her Physio, but of course she want to see outcomes and after-last x ray, she loose some faith .. Now is all ok again, but it was something detrimental to all.
If x rays really would reflect the reality .. but still seems very strange that she has lost 10° and then recovered 9° as x rays showed.
X rays should to be taken in a perfect frontal plane and I believe pelvis was tilted relative to the torso, because one side of the pelvis seemed much smaller than the other one in some x rays.
There should to be a much more accurate method, but it's true that measuring height is neither, although I do two measurements (with and without stretch), which was not made with x rays.