Originally posted by Pooka1
View Post
"A search of the MEDLINE database in 2010 and updated in 2011 identified a total of five
publications on vertebral stapling; all from Betz et al. The most recent (2010 and 2011)
publication reported on 29 patients with juvenile or adolescent idiopathic scoliosis who met the
study inclusion criteria (out of a database of 93 patients). The reasons for excluding 69% of the
patients from the database were not specifically described but included a change in the type of
staple in 2002."
https://www.bcbsal.org/providers/policies/final/464.pdf
So that got me up to 2011, then I went to PubMed and searched on Betz's name and stapling and I came up with one more article, but it was exclusively about children under 10.
So, I stated what I'd found with the caveat that it was "what I could find" so that Maria or Gayle could update me with anything more recent. And here we are.
I'll add, again, that the "As usual" is sort of unpleasantly zingy. If you have better data, just post it. There's no need to insult me - just post something newer/more comprehensive.
So, anyway, to the best of my knowledge, Betz is including just 29 patients in his published studies. Which is roughly equivalent to the number of kids in the torso rotation studies. Hence my statement that it's all based on very few data points and that parents really have to guide themselves on glimmers.
Originally posted by Pooka1
View Post
Originally posted by Pooka1
View Post
Sure, yes, it matters. What Mooney did was classic good science (IMO). He had a theory about something that might work, and he ran a pilot study and it looked like there was something there. Then Kevin followed up with a study which appeared to replicate the results. Is it a huge number? No, and I doubt it ever will be. There's just no one with deep pockets who could follow up. You'd need a surgeon, like Dr. Mehta, who is willing to enroll their own patients to get the necessary numbers. But, as I recall, the results were partly measured against natural history - you had a couple of AIS kids who reduced their curve - something which doesn't happen with natural history.
So, yes, it matters. That's why people were interested in it. And they're interested in Betz' work, even though his most recent published research (caveat: that I can find) only concerns 29 patients.
When the choices are bracing/fusion, then people are willing to take a chance on methods with even very small numbers. Totally reasonable, in my book.
Originally posted by Pooka1
View Post
Comment