Abstract

Objective: We aimed to investigate how the heights of the vertebral bodies on the concave and convex sides, as well as the differences between these heights, affect the Cobb angle in patients presenting with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS).

Materials and Methods: Radiographs and computed tomography (CT) images of 23 patients aged 13-18 years diagnosed with AIS were retrospectively analyzed. The heights of the vertebral bodies on the concave and convex sides were measured and compared with the curvatures determined using the Cobb method. The contributions of the vertebral body Cobb angle and the intervertebral disc Cobb angle to the total Cobb angle were also evaluated.

Results: The vertebral body Cobb angle contributed an average of 52% to the total Cobb angle, while the intervertebral disc Cobb angle contributed an average of 48%. A stronger correlation was observed between the intervertebral disc Cobb angle and the total angle than between the vertebral body Cobb angle and the total angle.

Conclusion: The reduced heights of both the intervertebral disc and the vertebral body on the concave side compared to the convex side indicate that as the difference between these values decreases, these components progressively move away from the apical vertebrae. This causes greater wedging at the apex and reduced wedging in adjacent segments, consequently increasing the total Cobb angle. Although the vertebral body Cobb angle contributes more numerically to the total Cobb angle, the relationship between the intervertebral disc Cobb angle and the total Cobb angle was found to be statistically stronger.

Keywords: scoliosis surgery, young adult idiopathic scoliosis, scoliosis, cobb angle, adolescent idiopathic scoliosis

Copyright and license

Copyright © 2026 The Author(s). This is an open-access article published by Bolu İzzet Baysal Training and Research Hospital under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY) which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited.

How to cite

1.
Kurtboğan M, Alkan C, Işık C, Çelik M, Arıkan E, Turhan MT, et al. The impact of intervertebral morphological structure on the cobb angle in patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Northwestern Med J. 2026;6(2):122-30. https://doi.org/10.54307/2026.NWMJ.227

References

  1. Abasi U, Allen A, Candelario-Velazquez C, Ranade S, Cancel D. Management of Hip and Spine in Neuromuscular Disorders. Phys Med Rehabil Clin N Am. 2025; 36(3): 429-45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pmr.2025.03.009
  2. Splittgerber R. Snell’s Clinical Neuroanatomy. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2024.
  3. Erguven SP. Development of Spinal Cord and Malformations. In: Yucel N, Hekimoglu G, editors. Health & Science 2024: Basic Medical Sciences - Central Nervous System. Istanbul: Efe Academy; 2024: 173-94.
  4. Alshryda S, Jones S, Banaszkiewicz PA, editors. Postgraduate Paediatric Orthopaedics: The Candidate’s Guide to the FRCS (Tr&Orth) Examination. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2024. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108989879
  5. Ramachandran K, Naik AS, Thippeswamy PB, Shetty AP, Kanna RM, Rajasekaran S. Curve magnitude and vertebral rotation influence the MRI predictability of pedicle dimensions in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: an analysis of 1,860 pedicles. Spine Deform. 2025; 13(6): 1819-29. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43390-025-01131-x
  6. Huang X, Luo M, Liu L, et al. The Comparison of Convolutional Neural Networks and the Manual Measurement of Cobb Angle in Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis. Global Spine J. 2024; 14(1): 159-68. https://doi.org/10.1177/21925682221098672
  7. Shen Y, Qin F, Pan Y, et al. Correlation between coronal wedge deformity and sagittal spinal curvature in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: a retrospective analysis. Sci Rep. 2024; 14(1): 29038. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-80704-8
  8. Qian L, Jiang Y, Zhang T, Sun K, Xu X, Yu J. 3D CT analysis of vertebral morphology in adolescent scoliosis and its severity correlation. Journal of Radiation Research and Applied Sciences. 2025; 18(4): 101948. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrras.2025.101948
  9. Okuwaki S, Kotani T, Sunami T, et al. Associated factors and effects of coronal vertebral wedging angle in thoracic adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. J Orthop Sci. 2024; 29(3): 704-10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jos.2023.03.003
  10. Oba H, Kelly MP, Fletcher N, et al. Three-Dimensional Analysis of Disc and Vertebral Height and Their Role in Kyphosis Creation in Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2025; 50(23): 1617-23. https://doi.org/10.1097/brs.0000000000005410
  11. Labrom FR, Izatt MT, Contractor P, et al. Sequential MRI reveals vertebral body wedging significantly contributes to coronal plane deformity progression in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis during growth. Spine Deform. 2020; 8(5): 901-10. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43390-020-00138-w
  12. Li L. Development of 3D spatial measurement method based on computed tomography images of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis [dissertation]. Hong Kong: The Hong Kong Polytechnic University; 2025.
  13. Shi C, Meng N, Zhuang Y, et al. Accurate Cobb Angle Estimation via SVD-Based Curve Detection and Vertebral Wedging Quantification. IEEE J Biomed Health Inform. 2025; 29(12): 8607-14. https://doi.org/10.1109/JBHI.2025.3600647
  14. Zhang H, Ye X, Wu H, et al. Relative anterior spinal overgrowth in mild and moderate adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: a retrospective study. Sci Rep. 2025; 15(1): 2651. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-025-86912-0
  15. Wang H, Ma Z, Wu Z, et al. Biomechanical analysis of spinal range of motion and intervertebral disc loadings in normal and adolescent idiopathic scoliosis models. Front Bioeng Biotechnol. 2025; 13: 1473776. https://doi.org/10.3389/fbioe.2025.1473776
  16. Zhang T, Gu X, Li H, Wu C, Zhao N, Peng X. Statistical Shape Modeling and Prediction of Lumbar Spine Morphology in Patients With Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis. J Biomech Eng. 2025; 147(5): 051002. https://doi.org/10.1115/1.4068010
  17. Singh V. Textbook of Clinical Neuroanatomy - E-Book. Elsevier Health Sciences; 2024.
  18. Grivas TB, Vasiliadis E, Soultanis K, et al. Idiopathic Scoliosis Progression: Presenting Rib and Segmental Rib Index as Predictors-A Literature Review. Med Sci (Basel). 2025; 13(2): 62. https://doi.org/10.3390/medsci13020062
  19. Zhang H, Ye X, Pan Y, et al. Evaluation of paraspinal muscles in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis: a study based on shear wave elastography. Spine Deform. 2025; 13(5): 1391-7. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43390-025-01110-2
  20. Labrom FR, Izatt MT, Askin GN, Labrom RD, Claus AP, Little JP. Segmental deformity markers offer novel indicators of deformity progression risk in deformity-matched adolescent idiopathic scoliosis patients. Spine Deform. 2024; 12(6): 1647-55. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43390-024-00927-7
  21. Wei W, Cheng L, Dong Y, et al. 2D and 3D Classification Systems for Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis: Clinical Implications and Technological Advances. Orthop Surg. 2025; 17(4): 999-1020. https://doi.org/10.1111/os.14362
  22. Gay M, Cobetto N, Caouette C, et al. Patient-specific biomechanical modeling of intraoperative scoliosis correction on the 2-year outcomes for thoracolumbar/lumbar vertebral body tethering. Spine Deform. 2026; 14(1): 31-8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43390-025-01166-0