Table 1.

Patient data

	Gender	Age	Neurological gradea	No. of affected segments	Preop. kyphosis angle	Postop. neurological gradea	Postop kyphosis angle	Fusion time (months)	Follow-up period (months)	Kyphosis angle following Follow-up period	Functional outcomea
1	M	32	E	T12–L2	72	E	20	6	55	22	E
2	F	63	D	L1–L3	38	E	−5	5	38	−5	E
3	M	50	C	T11–T12	31	D	5	9	57	5	G
4	M	22	D	T10–T12	55	E	18	7	45	20	E
5	M	12	E	L2–L3	25	E	−10	4	70	−8	E
6	F	18	E	L1–L2	25	E	−5	13	46	−4	E
7	F	45	E	T10–T12	38	E	10	8	42	10	E
8	M	64	B	T11–L2	40	B	5	6	37	5	F
9	F	28	E	T9–T11	35	E	15	5	39	15	E
10	M	56	C	L1–L2	20	E	−8	10	64	−7	E
11	M	67	D	T11–T12	45	E	10	8	41	10	E
12	M	34	E	T10–L1	36	E	14	6	40	15	E
13	M	42	D	T11–L1	57	E	15	5	39	16	E
14	F	69	B	L1–L2	25	E	−10	9	38	−8	E
15	M	40	D	T10–L2	62	E	15	6	67	15	E
16	M	29	E	T11–L1	42	E	12	8	80	12	E
17	F	35	E	T12–L1	37	E	10	7	65	11	E
18	F	28	D	T11–L2	44	E	5	8	47	5	E
19	M	42	E	T10–L1	52	E	14	9	50	15	E
20	F	51	D	T12–L1	28	E	−5	6	94	−3	E

^aNeurological grade evaluated according to Frankel et al. [7]