Novel Surface Topographic Assessment of Lung Volume and Pulmonary Function Tests in Idiopathic Scoliosis: A Preliminary Study

Abstract

Objective: Severe spinal deformity results in restrictive pulmonary disease from thoracic distortions and lung-volume limitations. Though spirometry and body plethysmography are widely accepted tests for pulmonary function tests (PFTs), they are time-consuming and require patient compliance. This study investigates whether surface topographic [surface topography (ST)] measurements of body volume difference (BVD) and torso volume difference between maximum inhale and exhale correlate to values determined on PFTs. Methods: This study included patients with idiopathic scoliosis and thoracic/thoracolumbar curves ≥40 degrees. Patients received ST scans, clinical examinations, and EOS biplanar radiographs on the same day. PFTs were performed within 3 months of ST/radiographic analysis. Univariate linear regression analysis was used to examine relationships between BVD, PFT values, and mean curves. Results: Sixteen patients (14.6 ± 2.2 y, 69% females) with idiopathic scoliosis and mean thoracic/thoracolumbar curves of 62 degrees ± 15˚ degrees (45 degrees to 93 degrees) were assessed. BVD displayed statistically high-positive positive correlations with forced vital capacity (R = 0.863, P < 0.0001), forced expiratory volume in 1 second (R = 0.870, P < 0.001), vital capacity (R = 0.802, P < 0.0001), and TLC (R = 0.831, P < 0.0001. Torso volume difference showed similarly high positive correlations to forced vital capacity, forced expiratory volume in 1 second, vital capacity, and TLC, but not residual volume. No correlations emerged between the mean thoracic/thoracolumbar curve and BVD or PFT values. Conclusion: This study strongly endorses further investigation into ST scanning as an alternative to traditional PFTs for assessing pulmonary volumes. The noncontact and noninvasive nature of ST scanning presents a valuable alternative method for analyzing thoracic volume, particularly beneficial for patients unable to cooperate with standard PFTs. Level of Evidence: Level II—prognostic.