Table 1.

Summary of available literature on the operative outcomes for SK

Article	Year	Study design	Surgical technique
Bradford et al [55]	1975	Case series	Posterior spinal fusion alone using Harrington compression instrumentation, n = 22. High rate (73%) of loss of correction after surgery.
Herndon et al [56]	1981	Case series	Good relief of pain in 12 of 13 patients treated with combined anterior and posterior fusion.
Otsuka et al [57]	1990	Case series	Used heavier Harrington compression rods n = 10 patients and reported good correction of kyphosis
Lowe and Kasten [38]	1994	Case series	n = 24 patients treated with staged anterior release and posterior fusion with l-rod instrumentation. Around 75% had good reduction in pain.
Wenger and Frick [28]	1999	Review	Review of all surgical techniques and the historical refining of techniques with time.
Lee et al [54]	2006	Retrospective cohort	Posterior-only vs antero-posterior fusion, n = 39. Posterior-only achieved and maintained better correction and had significantly less complications.
Koller et al [51]	2014	Case series	Anterior release and posterior spinal fusion (combined approach), n = 111 patients at a single center. Results showed comparable correction and outcomes.
Huq et al [39••]	2020	Systematic review	Found that posterior-only approach is gaining in popularity, provides greater correction, and has smaller complication profile.
Tsirikos et al [58••]	2021	Prospective cohort study	Posterior spinal fusion with closing wedge osteotomies and hybrid instrumentation, n = 88 patients. Results showed satisfactory correction, improvements in physical and mental health, and a high degree of patient-reported satisfaction
Sebaaly et al [17•]	2022	Review	Review of surgical treatments found that the combined A/P approach was considered the gold standard for the surgical treatment of this disease, but there is an increasing trend toward posterior-only approaches especially with the use of segmental fixation and osteotomy.