Tag: adult spinal deformity

Posted on

Surgical versus Nonsurgical Treatment for Adult Spinal Deformity: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

World Neurosurg. (2022) 159:1-11

OBJECTIVE: To systematically evaluate the efficacy and safety of surgical and nonsurgical methods for the treatment of adult spinal deformity (ASD).

METHODS: The PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases were searched for relevant controlled studies of surgical and nonsurgical approaches for the treatment of ASD; all studies reported from database creation to October 2021 were eligible for inclusion. Stata 11.0 software was used for the metaanalysis. Publication bias was assessed using a Begg test. Heterogeneity was assessed using the I2 test, and fixed-effects or random-effects models were used, as appropriate. Meta-regression was used to determine the cause of heterogeneity. Subgroup analyses were performed to assess the effects of age on the outcomes. –

RESULTS: Eleven articles comprising 1880 participants met the inclusion criteria. Meta-analysis showed that surgical treatment was associated with a better improvement in function than was nonsurgical treatment (Scoliosis Research Society 22 questionnaire score change value: weighted mean difference [ 0.696; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.686e0.705; P < 0.0001; Oswestry Dysfunction Index change value: WMD [ 11.222; 95% CI, 10.801e11.642; P < 0.0001). Surgical treatment was more effective in relieving pain and correcting the deformity (numeric rating scale pain score: WMD[3.341; 95% CI, 2.832e3.85; P < 0.0001; Cobb angle change value: WMD [ 15.036 ; 95% CI, 13.325e16.747; P < 0.0001). The complication rate in the surgical group was 17.6%e80.3%.

CONCLUSIONS: Surgical treatment is better than nonsurgical methods for improving the function of patients with ASD and achieving good pain improvement and deformity correction. Elderly patients with ASD can also obtain good symptomatic improvement through surgery

Posted on

Patient outcomes after circumferential minimally invasive surgery compared with those of open correction for adult spinal deformity

J Neurosurg Spine 36:203–214, 2022

Circumferential minimally invasive spine surgery (cMIS) for adult scoliosis has become more advanced and powerful, but direct comparison with traditional open correction using prospectively collected data is limited. The authors performed a retrospective review of prospectively collected, multicenter adult spinal deformity data. The authors directly compared cMIS for adult scoliosis with open correction in propensity-matched cohorts using health-related quality-of-life (HRQOL) measures and surgical parameters.

METHODS Data from a prospective, multicenter adult spinal deformity database were retrospectively reviewed. Inclusion criteria were age > 18 years, minimum 1-year follow-up, and one of the following characteristics: pelvic tilt (PT) > 25 , pelvic incidence minus lumbar lordosis (PI-LL) > 10 , Cobb angle > 20 , or sagittal vertical axis (SVA) > 5 cm. Patients were categorized as undergoing cMIS (percutaneous screws with minimally invasive anterior interbody fusion) or open correction (traditional open deformity correction). Propensity matching was used to create two equal groups and to control for age, BMI, preoperative PI-LL, pelvic incidence (PI), T1 pelvic angle (T1PA), SVA, PT, and number of posterior levels fused.

RESULTS A total of 154 patients (77 underwent open procedures and 77 underwent cMIS) were included after matching for age, BMI, PI-LL (mean 15  vs 17 , respectively), PI (54  vs 54 ), T1PA (21  vs 22 ), and mean number of levels fused (6.3 vs 6). Patients who underwent three-column osteotomy were excluded. Follow-up was 1 year for all patients. Postoperative Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) (p = 0.50), Scoliosis Research Society–total (p = 0.45), and EQ-5D (p = 0.33) scores were not different between cMIS and open patients. Maximum Cobb angles were similar for open and cMIS basepatients at baseline (25.9  vs 26.3 , p = 0.85) and at 1 year postoperation (15.0  vs 17.5 , p = 0.17). In total, 58.3% of open patients and 64.4% of cMIS patients (p = 0.31) reached the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) in ODI at 1 year. At 1 year, no differences were observed in terms of PI-LL (p = 0.71), SVA (p = 0.46), PT (p = 0.9), or Cobb angle (p = 0.20). Open patients had greater estimated blood loss compared with cMIS patients (1.36 L vs 0.524 L, p < 0.05) and fewer levels of interbody fusion (1.87 vs 3.46, p < 0.05), but shorter operative times (356 minutes vs 452 minutes, p = 0.003). Revision surgery rates between the two cohorts were similar (p = 0.97).

CONCLUSIONS When cMIS was compared with open adult scoliosis correction with propensity matching, HRQOL improvement, spinopelvic parameters, revision surgery rates, and proportions of patients who reached MCID were similar between cohorts. However, well-selected cMIS patients had less blood loss, comparable results, and longer operative times in comparison with open patients.

 

 

Posted on

Impact of an intraoperative coronal spinal alignment measurement technique using a navigational tool for a 3D spinal rod bending system in adult spinal deformity cases

J Neurosurg Spine 36:62–70, 2022

In corrective spinal surgery for adult spinal deformity (ASD), the focus has been on achieving optimal spinopelvic alignment. However, the correction of coronal spinal alignment is equally important. The conventional intraoperative measurement methods currently used for coronal alignment are not ideal. Here, the authors have developed a new intraoperative coronal alignment measurement technique using a navigational tool for a 3D spinal rod bending system (CAMNBS). The purpose of this study was to test the feasibility of using the CAMNBS for coronal spinal alignment and to evaluate its usefulness in corrective spinal surgery for ASD.

METHODS In this retrospective cohort study, patients with degenerative lumbar kyphoscoliosis, a Cobb angle ≥ 20°, and lumbar lordosis ≤ 20° who had undergone corrective surgery (n = 67) were included. The pelvic teardrops on both sides, the S1 spinous process, the central point of the apex, a point on the 30-mm cranial (or caudal) side of the apex, and the central point of the upper instrumented vertebra (UIV) and C7 vertebra were registered using the CAMNBS. The positional information of all registered points was displayed as 2D figures on a monitor. Deviation of the UIV plumb line from the central sacral vertical line (UIV-CSVL) and deviation of the C7 plumb line from the CSVL (C7-CSVL) were measured using the 2D figures. Nineteen patients evaluated using the CAMNBS (BS group) were compared with 48 patients evaluated using conventional intraoperative radiography (XR group). The UIV-CSVL measured intraoperatively using the CAMNBS was compared with that measured using postoperative radiography. The prevalence of postoperative coronal malalignment (CM) and the absolute value of postoperative C7-CSVL were compared between the groups on radiographs obtained in the standing position within 4 weeks after surgery. Postoperative CM was defined as the absolute value of C7-CSVL ≥ 30 mm. Further, the measurement time and amount of radiation exposure were measured.

RESULTS No significant differences in demographic, sagittal, and coronal parameters were observed between the two groups. UIV-CSVL was 2.3 ± 9.5 mm with the CAMNBS and 1.8 ± 16.6 mm with the radiographs, showing no significant difference between the two methods (p = 0.92). The prevalence of CM was 2/19 (10.5%) in the BS group and 18/48 (37.5%) in the XR group, and absolute values of C7-CSVL were 15.2 ± 13.1 mm in the BS group and 25.0 ± 18.0 mm in the XR group, showing statistically significant differences in both comparisons (p = 0.04 and 0.03, respectively). The CAMNBS method required 3.5 ± 0.9 minutes, while the conventional radiograph method required 13.3 ± 1.5 minutes; radiation exposure was 2.1 ± 1.1 mGy in the BS group and 2.9 ± 0.6 mGy in the XR group. Statistically significant differences were demonstrated in both comparisons (p = 0.0002 and 0.03, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS From this study, it was evident that the CAMNBS did not increase postoperative CM compared with that seen using the conventional radiographic method, and hence can be used in clinical practice.

 

Posted on

Understanding sagittal compensation in adult spinal deformity patients: relationship between pelvic tilt and lower-extremity position

J Neurosurg Spine 35:616–623, 2021

In adult spinal deformity (ASD), quantifying preoperative lower-extremity (LE) compensation is important in formulating an operative plan to achieve optimal global sagittal alignment. Whole-body radiographs are not always available. This study evaluated the possibility of estimating LE compensation without whole-body radiographs.

METHODS In total, 200 consecutive ASD patients with full-body radiographic assessment were categorized into the following three groups according to their cranio-hip balance (distance from the cranial sagittal vertical axis to the hip axis [CrSVA-H]): group 1, anterior-shift (A-shift) group (CrSVA-H > 40 mm); group 2, balanced group, −40 mm < CrSVA-H < 40 mm; and group 3, posterior-shift (P-shift) group, CrSVA-H < −40 mm. After analyzing the correlation between CrSVAH, pelvic tilt (PT), and LE parameters, the cutoff PT and PT/pelvic incidence (PI) values that correlated with the presence of LE compensation were determined. Previously published data from asymptomatic volunteers were used as a baseline threshold (sacrofemoral angle [SFA] > 217.0° and knee flexion angle [KA] > 11.0°).

RESULTS Among the hip, knee, and ankle, only KA showed a significant increase in the A-shift group compared to the other two groups (p < 0.01). With a wide threshold (SFA > 208.0° and KA > 5.0°), 84.9% of the A-shift group showed LE compensation (hip or knee or both), which was a significantly greater percentage than those in the balanced and P-shift groups (48.4% and 51.9%, p < 0.01). With a narrow threshold (SFA > 217.0° and KA > 11.0°), 62.2% of the A-shift group showed any LE compensation, which was also a higher percentage than the other two groups. The CrSVA-H was moderately correlated with KA (r = 0.502), but had no correlation with PT, SFA, and ankle dorsiflexion angle (AA). PT showed a moderate/strong correlation with SFA, KA, and AA (r = 0.846, 0.624, and 0.622, respectively). With receiver operating characteristic curves, the authors determined that a 23.0° PT with PT/PI > 0.46 predicts the presence of any type of LE compensation with use of the wide threshold.

CONCLUSIONS ASD patients with increased CrSVA-H, which represents cranio-hip anterior imbalance, demonstrated a higher prevalence of LE compensation, especially knee flexion, compared to those with neutral and posterior shift of CrSVA. PT represents the extent of LE compensation in patients with spinal sagittal malalignment. Using the cutoff value of PT determined in this study, surgeons can preoperatively estimate the extent of LE compensation without obtaining a full-body radiograph.

Posted on

Anterior Column Realignment: Analysis of Neurological Risk and Radiographic Outcomes

Neurosurgery DOI:10.1093/neuros/nyaa064

Anterior column realignment (ACR) is a less invasive alternative to 3-column osteotomy for the correction of sagittal imbalance. We hypothesized that ACR would correct sagittal imbalance with an acceptable neurological risk. OBJECTIVE: To assess long-term neurological and radiographic outcomes after ACR.

METHODS: Patients ≥18 yr who underwent ACR from 2005 to 2013 were eligible. Standing scoliosis radiographs were studied at preoperation, postoperation (≤6 wk), and at minimum 2 yr of follow-up. Clinical/radiographic data were collected through a retrospective chart review, with thoracic 1 spino-pelvic inclination (T1SPi) used as the angular surrogate for sagittal vertical axis.

RESULTS: A total of 26 patients had complete data, with a mean follow-up of 2.8 yr (1.8- 7.4). Preoperative, sagittal parameters were lumbar lordosis (LL) of −16.1◦, pelvic incidence (PI)-LL of 41.7◦, T1SPi of 3.6◦, and pelvis tilt (PT) of 32.4◦. LL improved by 30.6◦ (P < .001) postoperation.Mean changes in PT (−8.3), sacral slope (8.9), T1SPi (−4.9), and PI-LL (−33.5) were all significant. The motion segment angle improved by 26.6◦, from 5.2◦ to −21.4◦ (P < .001). Neurological complications occurred in 32% patients postoperation (n = 8; 1 patient with both sensory and motor). New thigh numbness/paresthesia developed in 3 (13%) patients postoperation; only 1 (4%) persisted at latest follow-up. A total of 6 (24%) patients developed a new lower extremity motor deficit postoperation,with 4 (8%) having persistent new weakness at last follow-up. Out of 8 patients with preoperative motor deficit, half saw improvement postoperation and 75% improved by last follow-up.

CONCLUSION: There was net motor improvement, with 24% of patients improving and 16% having persistent new weakness at latest follow-up; 60% were unchanged. Radiographic results demonstrate that ACR is a useful tool to treat severe sagittal plane deformity.

Posted on

Uncertainty in the Relationship Between Sagittal Alignment and Patient-Reported Outcomes

Neurosurgery 86:485–491, 2020

Previous studies have reported correlations and precise quantitative relationships between sagittal alignment and health-related quality-of-life (HRQOL) scores. These studies have not reported the extent of uncertainty in these relationships.

OBJECTIVE: To explore the uncertainty in the overall relationships between sagittal alignment and HRQOL and in the predictions of individual patient pain and disability.

METHODS: A retrospective analysis of all new adult patients with long-cassette radiographs and complete outcomes questionnaires presenting to the senior author from 2012 to 2014 was performed. Univariable maximum a posteriori linear regression analyses using Bayesian methods were performed. High-density probability intervals for mean regression relationships and for individual values were calculated using minimally informative prior distributions.

RESULTS: A total of 134 patients satisfied inclusion criteria and were included. For Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) vs pelvic incidence-lumbar lordosis (LL), the 90% high-density probability interval ranged from –0.04 to 0.23, indicating that both the magnitude and direction of the relationship were uncertain. For both ODI vs sagittal vertical axis and ODI vs LL, there was uncertainty in the magnitude of the slope.Wide regions of uncertainty were also seen for predicting individual patient scores.

CONCLUSION: We report the previously unpublished degree of uncertainty in the mean quantitative relationships between radiographic sagittal alignment and patient-reported outcomes and in individual patient outcomes scores. Based on these results, establishing treatment thresholds or predicting an individual’s outcome is unreliable. Further research efforts should be focused on developing multilevel hierarchical models incorporating parameter uncertainty and heterogeneous effects.

Posted on

Surgical correction of severe adult lumbar scoliosis (major curves ≥ 75°): retrospective analysis with minimum 2-year follow-up

J Neurosurg Spine 31:548–561, 2019

Prior reports have demonstrated the efficacy of surgical correction for adult lumbar scoliosis. Many of these reports focused on mild to moderate scoliosis. The authors’ objective was to report their experience and to assess outcomes and complications after deformity correction for severe adult scoliosis.

METHODS The authors retrospectively analyzed consecutive adult scoliosis patients with major thoracolumbar/lumbar (TL/L) curves ≥ 75° who underwent deformity correction at their institution. Those eligible with a minimum 2 years of follow-up were included. Demographic, surgical, coronal and sagittal plane radiographic measurements, and healthrelated quality of life (HRQL) scores were analyzed.

RESULTS Among 26 potentially eligible patients, 22 (85%) had a minimum 2 years of follow-up (range 24–89 months) and were included in the study (mean age 57 ± 11 years; 91% women). The cohort comprised 16 (73%), 4 (18%), and 2 (9%) patients with adult idiopathic scoliosis, de novo degenerative scoliosis, and iatrogenic scoliosis, respectively. The surgical approach was posterior-only and multistage anterior-posterior in 18 (82%) and 4 (18%) patients, respectively. Three-column osteotomy was performed in 5 (23%) patients. Transforaminal and anterior lumbar interbody fusion were performed in 14 (64%) and 4 (18%) patients, respectively. All patients had sacropelvic fixation with uppermost instrumented vertebra in the lower thoracic spine (46% [10/22]) versus upper thoracic spine (55% [12/22]). The mean fusion length was 14 ± 3 levels. Preoperative major TL/L and lumbosacral fractional (L4–S1) curves were corrected from 83° ± 8° to 28° ± 13° (p < 0.001) and 34° ± 8° to 13° ± 6° (p < 0.001), respectively. Global coronal and sagittal balance significantly improved from 5 ± 4 cm to 1 ± 1 cm (p = 0.001) and 9 ± 8 cm to 2 ± 3 cm (p < 0.001), respectively. Pelvic tilt significantly improved from 33° ± 9° to 23° ± 10° (p < 0.001). Significant improvement in HRQL measures included the following: Scoliosis Research Society (SRS) pain score (p = 0.009), SRS appearance score (p = 0.004), and SF-12/ SF-36 physical component summary (PCS) score (p = 0.026). Transient and persistent neurological deficits occurred in 8 (36%) and 2 (9%) patients, respectively. Rod fracture/pseudarthrosis occurred in 6 (27%) patients (supplemental rods were utilized more recently in 23%). Revisions were performed in 7 (32%) patients.

CONCLUSIONS In this single-center surgical series for severe adult scoliosis (major curves ≥ 75°), a posterior-only or multistage anterior-posterior approach provided major curve correction of 66% and significant improvements in global coronal and sagittal spinopelvic alignment. Significant improvements were also demonstrated in HRQL measures (SRS pain, SRS appearance, and SF-12/SF-36 PCS). Complications and revisions were comparable to those of other reports involving less severe scoliosis. The results of this study warrant future prospective multicenter studies to further delineate outcomes and complication risks for severe adult scoliosis correction.

Posted on

Is achieving optimal spinopelvic parameters necessary to obtain substantial clinical benefit?

J Neurosurg Spine 30:833–838, 2019

It is now well accepted that spinopelvic parameters are correlated with clinical outcomes in adult spinal deformity (ASD). The purpose of this study was to determine whether obtaining optimal spinopelvic alignment was absolutely necessary to achieve a minimum clinically important difference (MCID) or substantial clinical benefit (SCB).

METHODS A multicenter retrospective review of patients who underwent less-invasive surgery for ASD was conducted. Inclusion criteria were age ≥ 18 years and one of the following: coronal Cobb angle > 20°, sagittal vertical axis (SVA) > 5 cm, pelvic tilt (PT) > 20°, or pelvic incidence to lumbar lordosis (PI-LL) mismatch > 10°. A total of 223 patients who were treated with circumferential minimally invasive surgery or hybrid surgery and had a minimum 2-year follow-up were identified. Based on optimal spinopelvic parameters (PI-LL mismatch ± 10° and SVA < 5 cm), patients were divided into aligned (AL) or malaligned (MAL) groups. The primary clinical outcome studied was the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) score.

RESULTS There were 74 patients in the AL group and 149 patients in the MAL group. Age and body mass index were similar between groups. Although the baseline SVA was similar, PI-LL mismatch (9.9° vs 17.7°, p = 0.002) and PT (19° vs 24.7°, p = 0.001) significantly differed between AL and MAL groups, respectively. As expected postoperatively, the AL and MAL groups differed significantly in PI-LL mismatch (-0.9° vs 13.1°, p < 0.001), PT (14° vs 25.5°, p = 0.001), and SVA (11.8 mm vs 48.3 mm, p < 0.001), respectively. Notably, there was no difference in the proportion of AL or MAL patients in whom an MCID (52.75% vs 61.1%, p > 0.05) or SCB (40.5% vs 46.3%, p > 0.05) was achieved for ODI score, respectively. Similarly, no differences in percentage of patients obtaining an MCID or SCB for visual analog scale back and leg pain score were observed. On multivariate analysis controlling for surgical and preoperative demographic differences, achieving optimal spinopelvic parameters was not associated with achieving an MCID (OR 0.645, 95% CI 0.31–1.33) or an SCB (OR 0.644, 95% CI 0.31–1.35) for ODI score.

CONCLUSIONS Achieving optimal spinopelvic parameters was not a predictor for achieving an MCID or SCB. Since spinopelvic parameters are correlated with clinical outcomes, the authors’ findings suggest that the presently accepted optimal spinopelvic parameters may require modification. Other factors, such as improvement in neurological symptoms and/or segmental instability, also likely impacted the clinical outcomes.

Posted on

Sagittal radiographic parameters demonstrate weak correlations with pretreatment patient-reported health-related quality of life measures in symptomatic de novo degenerative lumbar scoliosis

J Neurosurg Spine 28:573–580, 2018

Previous studies have demonstrated that among patients with adult spinal deformity (ASD), sagittal plane malalignment is poorly tolerated and correlates with suboptimal patient-reported health-related quality of life (HRQOL). These studies included a broad range of radiographic abnormalities and various types of ASD. However, the clinical and radiographic characteristics of de novo degenerative lumbar scoliosis (DNDLS), a subtype of ASD, may influence previously reported correlation strengths. The aim of this study was to correlate sagittal radiographic parameters with pretreatment HRQOL in patients with symptomatic DNDLS.

METHODS In this multicenter retrospective study of prospectively collected data, 74 patients with symptomatic DNDLS were enrolled based on anteroposterior and lateral 36-inch standing radiographs. Measurements included Cobb angle, coronal imbalance, pelvic incidence (PI), pelvic tilt (PT), lumbar lordosis (LL), sagittal vertical axis (SVA), thoracic kyphosis, pelvic incidence minus lumbar lordosis (PI-LL), T1-pelvic angle, and global tilt. HRQOL questionnaires included the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Scoliosis Research Society (SRS-22r), 36-item Short-Form Health Survey, and numeric rating scale (NRS) for back and leg pain. Correlations between radiographic parameters and HRQOL were assessed. Finally, HRQOL and increasing severity of sagittal modifiers (SVA, PI-LL, and PT) were evaluated.

RESULTS Weak correlations were found between SVA and ODI (r = 0.296, p < 0.05) and PT with NRS back pain and the SRS pain domain (r = -0.260, p < 0.05, and r = 0.282, p < 0.05, respectively). Other sagittal radiographic parameters did not show any significant correlation with HRQOL. No significant differences in HRQOL were found concerning the increasing severity of PT, PI-LL, and SVA.

CONCLUSIONS While DNDLS is a severe disabling condition, no noteworthy association between clinical and sagittal radiographic parameters was found through this study, demonstrating that sagittal radiographic parameters should not be considered the unique predictor of pretreatment suboptimal health status in this specific group of patients. Future studies addressing classification and treatment algorithms will have to take into account the existing subgroups of ASD.

Posted on

Relative lumbar lordosis and lordosis distribution index

Neurosurg Focus 43 (6):E5, 2017

The subtraction of lumbar lordosis (LL) from the pelvic incidence (PI) offers an estimate of the LL required for a given PI value. Relative LL (RLL) and the lordosis distribution index (LDI) are PI-based individualized measures. RLL quantifies the magnitude of lordosis relative to the ideal lordosis as defined by the magnitude of PI. LDI defines the magnitude of lower arc lordosis in proportion to total lordosis. The aim of this study was to compare RLL and PI – LL for their ability to predict postoperative complications and their correlations with health-related quality of life (HRQOL) scores.
METHODS Inclusion criteria were ≥ 4 levels of fusion and ≥ 2 years of follow-up. Mechanical complications were proximal junctional kyphosis/proximal junctional failure, distal junctional kyphosis/distal junctional failure, rod breakage, and implant-related complications. Correlations between PI – LL, RLL, PI, and HRQOL were analyzed using the Pearson correlation coefficient. Mechanical complication rates in PI – LL, RLL, LDI, RLL, and LDI interpreted together, and RLL subgroups for each PI – LL category were compared using chi-square tests and the exact test. Predictive models for mechanical complications with RLL and PI – LL were analyzed using binomial logistic regressions.
RESULTS Two hundred twenty-two patients (168 women, 54 men) were included. The mean age was 52.2 ± 19.3 years (range 18–84 years). The mean follow-up was 28.8 ± 8.2 months (range 24–62 months). There was a significant correlation between PI – LL and PI (r = 0.441, p < 0.001), threatening the use of PI – LL to quantify spinopelvic mismatch for different PI values. RLL was not correlated with PI (r = -0.093, p > 0.05); therefore, it was able to quantify divergence from ideal lordosis for all PI values. Compared with PI – LL, RLL had stronger correlations with HRQOL scores (p < 0.05). Discrimination performance was better for the model with RLL than for PI – LL. The agreement between RLL and PI – LL was high (k = 0.943, p < 0.001), moderate (k = 0.455, p < 0.001), and poor (k = -0.154, p = 0.343), respectively, for large, average, and small PI sizes. When analyzed by RLL, each PI – LL category was further divided into distinct groups of patients who had different mechanical complication rates (p < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS Using the formula of PI – LL may be insufficient to quantify normolordosis for the whole spectrum of PI values when applied as an absolute numeric value in conjunction with previously reported population-based average thresholds of 10° and 20°. Schwab PI – LL groups were found to constitute an inhomogeneous group of patients. RLL offers an individualized quantification of LL for all PI sizes. Compared with PI – LL, RLL showed a greater association with both mechanical complications and HRQOL. The use of RLL and LDI together, instead of PI – LL, for surgical planning may result in lower mechanical complication rates and better long-term HRQOL.

Posted on

A Staged Protocol for Circumferential Minimally Invasive Surgical Correction of Adult Spinal Deformity

Neurosurgery 81:733–739, 2017

Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) techniques used for management of adult spinal deformity (ASD) aim to decrease the physiological demand on patients and minimize postoperative complications. A circumferential MIS (cMIS) protocol offers the potential to maximize this advantage over standard open approaches, through the concurrent use of multiple MIS techniques.

OBJECTIVE: To demonstrate through a case example the execution of a cMIS protocol for management of an ASD patient with severe deformity.

METHODS: Thorough preoperative assessment, surgical planning, and medical optimization were completed. Deformity correction was performed over 2 stages. During the first stage, interbody fusion was performed via an oblique lateral approach at all levels of the lumbar spine intended to be included in the final construct. The patient was kept as an inpatient and mobilized postoperatively. They were then re-imaged with standing films. The second stage occurred after 3 d and involved percutaneous instrumentation of all levels. Posterior fusion of the thoracic levels was achieved through decortication of pars and facets. These areas were accessed through the intermuscular plane established by the percutaneous screws. The patient was mobilizing on their first postoperative day.

RESULTS: In a 66-yr-old female with severe sagittal imbalance and debilitating back pain, effective use of this cMIS protocol allowed for correction of the Cobb angle from 52◦ to 4◦ correction of spinopelvic parameters and 13 cm of sagittal vertical axis improvement. No complications were identified by 2 yr postoperative.

CONCLUSION: As a systematization of multiple MIS techniques combined, in a specific and staged manner, this cMIS protocol could provide a safe and effective approach to the management of ASD.

 

Posted on

Does MIS Surgery Allow for Shorter Constructs in the Surgical Treatment of Adult Spinal Deformity?

Neurosurgery 80:489–497, 2017

The length of construct can potentially influence perioperative risks in adult spinal deformity (ASD) surgery. A head-to-head comparison between open and minimally invasive surgery (MIS) techniques for treatment of ASD has yet to be performed.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the impact of MIS approaches on construct length and clinical outcomes in comparison to traditional open approaches when treating similar ASD profiles.

METHODS: Two multicenter databases for ASD, 1 involving MIS procedures and the other open procedures, were propensity matched for clinical and radiographic parameters in this observational study. Inclusion criteria were ASD and minimum 2-year follow-up. Independent t-test and chi-square test were used to evaluate and compare outcomes.

RESULTS: A total of 1215 patients were identified, with 84 patients matched in each group. Statistical significance was found for mean levels fused (4.8 for circumferential MIS [cMIS] and 10.1 for open), mean interbody fusion levels (3.6 cMIS and 2.4 open), blood loss (estimated blood loss 488 mL cMIS and 1762 mL open), and hospital length of stay (6.7 days cMIS and 9.7 days open). There was no significant difference in preoperative radiographic parameters or postoperative clinical outcomes (Owestry Disability Index and visual analog scale) between groups. There was a significant difference in postoperative lumbar lordosis (43.3◦ cMIS and 49.8◦ open) and pelvic incidence-lumbar lordosis correction (10.6◦ cMIS and 5.2◦ open) in the open group. There was no significant difference in reoperation rate between the 2 groups.

CONCLUSION: MIS techniques for ASD may reduce construct length, reoperation rates, blood loss, and length of stay without affecting clinical and radiographic outcomes when compared to a similar group of patients treated with open techniques.

Posted on

Different Risk Factors of Proximal Junctional Kyphosis and Proximal Junctional Failure Following Long Instrumented Fusion to the Sacrum for Adult Spinal Deformity

Neurosurgery 80:279–286, 2017

The failure modes, time to development, and clinical relevance are known to differ between proximal junctional kyphosis (PJK) and proximal junctional failure (PJF). However, there are no reports that study the risk factors of PJK and PJF separately.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to investigate the risk factors for PJK and PJF separately.

METHODS: A retrospective study of 160 consecutive patients who underwent a long instrumented fusion to the sacrum for adult spinal deformity with a minimum follow-up of years was conducted. A separate survivorship analysis of PJK and PJF was performed using the Cox proportional hazards model for the 3 categorical parameters of surgical, radiographic, and patient factors.

RESULTS: PJK developed in 27 patients (16.9%) and PJF in 29 patients (18.1%). The median survival time was 17.0 months for PJK and 3.0 months for PJF. Multivariate analyses revealed that a high body mass index was an independent risk factor for PJK (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.179), whereas the significant risk factors for PJF were older age, the presence of osteoporosis, the uppermost instrumented vertebra level at T11-L1, and a greater preoperative sagittal vertical axis (HR = 1.082, 6.465, 5.236, and 1.017, respectively). A large correction of sagittal deformity was shown to be a risk factor for PJF on univariate analyses, but not on multivariate analyses.

CONCLUSION: PJK developed at a median of 17 months and PJF at a median of 3 months. A high body mass index was an independent risk factor for PJK, whereas older age, osteoporosis, uppermost instrumented vertebra level at the thoracolumbar junction, and greater preoperative sagittal vertical axis were risk factors for PJF.

 

Posted on

Lateral interbody fusion combined with open posterior surgery for adult spinal deformity

J Neurosurg Spine 25:697–705, 2016

Lateral interbody fusion (LIF) with percutaneous screw fixation can treat adult spinal deformity (ASD) in the coronal plane, but sagittal correction is limited. The authors combined LIF with open posterior (OP) surgery using facet osteotomies and a rod-cantilever technique to enhance lumbar lordosis (LL). It is unclear how this hybrid strategy compares to OP surgery alone. The goal of this study was to evaluate the combination of LIF and OP surgery (LIF+OP) for ASD.

Methods All thoracolumbar ASD cases from 2009 to 2014 were reviewed. Patients with < 6 months follow-up, prior fusion, severe sagittal imbalance (sagittal vertical axis > 200 mm or pelvic incidence-LL > 40°), and those undergoing anterior lumbar interbody fusion were excluded. Deformity correction, complications, and outcomes were compared between LIF+OP and OP-only surgery patients.

Results LIF+OP (n = 32) and OP-only patients (n = 60) had similar baseline features and posterior fusion levels. On average, 3.8 LIFs were performed. Patients who underwent LIF+OP had less blood loss (1129 vs 1833 ml, p = 0.016) and lower durotomy rates (0% vs 23%, p = 0.002). Patients in the LIF+OP group required less ICU care (0.7 vs 2.8 days, p < 0.001) and inpatient rehabilitation (63% vs 87%, p = 0.015). The incidence of new leg pain, numbness, or weakness was similar between groups (28% vs 22%, p = 0.609). All leg symptoms resolved within 6 months, except in 1 OP-only patient. Follow-up duration was similar (28 vs 25 months, p = 0.462). LIF+OP patients had significantly less pseudarthrosis (6% vs 27%, p = 0.026) and greater improvement in visual analog scale back pain (mean decrease 4.0 vs 1.9, p = 0.046) and Oswestry Disability Index (mean decrease 21 vs 12, p = 0.035) scores. Lumbar coronal correction was greater with LIF+OP surgery (mean [± SD] 22° ± 13° vs 14° ± 13°, p = 0.010). LL restoration was 22° ± 13°, intermediately between OP-only with facet osteotomies (11° ± 7°, p < 0.001) and pedicle subtraction osteotomy (29° ± 10°, p = 0.045).

Conclusions LIF+OP is an effective strategy for ASD of moderate severity. Compared with the authors’ OP-only operations, LIF+OP was associated with faster recovery, fewer complications, and greater relief of pain and disability.

Posted on

Outcomes of Operative and Nonoperative Treatment for Adult Spinal Deformity

adult lumbar scoliosis

Neurosurgery 78:851–861, 2016

High-quality studies that compare operative and nonoperative treatment for adult spinal deformity (ASD) are needed.

OBJECTIVE: To compare outcomes of operative and nonoperative treatment for ASD.

METHODS: This is a multicenter, prospective analysis of consecutive ASD patients opting for operative or nonoperative care. Inclusion criteria were age .18 years and ASD. Operative and nonoperative patients were propensity matched with the baseline Oswestry Disability Index, Scoliosis Research Society-22r, thoracolumbar/lumbar Cobb angle, pelvic incidence–to–lumbar lordosis mismatch (PI-LL), and leg pain score. Analyses were confined to patients with a minimum of 2 years of follow-up.

RESULTS: Two hundred eighty-six operative and 403 nonoperative patients met the criteria, with mean ages of 53 and 55 years, 2-year follow-up rates of 86% and 55%, and mean follow-up of 24.7 and 24.8 months, respectively. At baseline, operative patients had significantly worse health-related quality of life (HRQOL) based on all measures assessed (P < .001) and had worse deformity based on pelvic tilt, pelvic incidence–to– lumbar lordosis mismatch, and sagittal vertical axis (P ≤ .002). At the minimum 2-year follow-up, all HRQOL measures assessed significantly improved for operative patients (P < .001), but none improved significantly for nonoperative patients except for modest improvements in the Scoliosis Research Society-22r pain (P = .04) and satisfaction (P < .001) domains. On the basis of matched operative-nonoperative cohorts (97 in each group), operative patients had significantly better HRQOL at follow-up for all measures assessed (P < .001), except Short Form-36 mental component score (P = .06). At the minimum 2-year follow-up, 71.5% of operative patients had ≥1 complications.

CONCLUSION: Operative treatment for ASD can provide significant improvement of HRQOL at a minimum 2-year follow-up. In contrast, nonoperative treatment on average maintains presenting levels of pain and disability.

Posted on

Radiographic outcomes of adult spinal deformity surgeries

Spinal adult deformity

Neurosurg Focus 36 (5):E13, 2014

Various surgical approaches, including open, minimally invasive, and hybrid techniques, have gained momentum in the management of adult spinal deformity. However, few data exist on the radiographic outcomes of different surgical techniques. The objective of this study was to compare the radiographic and clinical outcomes of the surgical techniques used in the treatment of adult spinal deformity.

Methods. The authors conducted a retrospective review of two adult spinal deformity patient databases, a prospective open surgery database and a retrospective minimally invasive surgery (MIS) and hybrid surgery database. The time frame of enrollment in this study was from 2007 to 2012. Spinal deformity patients were stratified into 3 surgery groups: MIS, hybrid surgery, and open surgery. The following pre- and postoperative radiographic parameters were assessed: lumbar major Cobb angle, lumbar lordosis, pelvic incidence minus lumbar lordosis (PI-LL), sagittal vertical axis, and pelvic tilt. Scores on the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and a visual analog scale (VAS) for both back and leg pain were also obtained from each patient.

Results. Of the 234 patients with adult spinal deformity, 184 patients had pre- and postoperative radiographs and were thus included in the study (MIS, n = 42; hybrid, n = 33; open, n = 109). Patients were a mean of 61.7 years old and had a mean body mass index of 26.9 kg/m2. Regarding radiographic outcomes, the MIS group maintained a significantly smaller mean lumbar Cobb angle (13.1°) after surgery compared with the open group (20.4°, p = 0.002), while the hybrid group had a significantly larger lumbar curve correction (26.6°) compared with the MIS group (18.8°, p = 0.045). The mean change in the PI-LL was larger for the hybrid group (20.6°) compared with the open (10.2°, p = 0.023) and MIS groups (5.5°, p = 0.003). The mean sagittal vertical axis correction was greater for the open group (25 mm) compared with the MIS group (≤ 1 mm, p = 0.008). Patients in the open group had a significantly larger postoperative thoracic kyphosis (41.45°) compared with the MIS patients (33.5°, p = 0.005). There were no significant differences between groups in terms of pre- and postoperative mean ODI and VAS scores at the 1-year follow-up. However, patients in the MIS group had much lower estimated blood loss and transfusion rates compared with patients in the hybrid or open groups (p < 0.001). Operating room time was significantly longer with the hybrid group compared with the MIS and open groups (p < 0.001). Major complications occurred in 14% of patients in the MIS group, 14% in the hybrid group, and 45% in the open group (p = 0.032).

Conclusions. This study provides valuable baseline characteristics of radiographic parameters among 3 different surgical techniques used in the treatment of adult spinal deformity. Each technique has advantages, but much like any surgical technique, the positive and negative elements must be considered when tailoring a treatment to a patient. Minimally invasive surgical techniques can result in clinical outcomes at 1 year comparable to those obtained from hybrid and open surgical techniques.

Posted on

Risk Factors of Sagittal Decompensation After Long Posterior Instrumentation and Fusion for Degenerative Lumbar Scoliosis

SPINE Volume 35, Number 17, pp 1595–1601.

Study Design. A retrospective study of clinical results of operative treatment for degenerative lumbar scoliosis.

Objective. To determine the risk factors of sagittal decompensation after long instrumentation and fusion to L5 or S1. Summary of Background Data. Little is known about the risk factors for sagittal decompensation, which was defined in this study as sagittal C7 plumb falling anterior 8 cm from the posterosuperior corner of the sacrum.

Methods. Forty-five patients (mean age: 64.4 year) with adult degenerative lumbar scoliosis were reviewed retrospectively with a minimum 2 years. The mean number of levels fused was 6.1  1.6 segments. The upper instrumented vertebra ranged from T9 to L2. The lower instrumented vertebra was L5 and S1 in 24 and 21 patients, respectively.

Results. Sagittal decompensation (SD) developed in 19 patients. The most significant risk factors of SD were preoperative sagittal imbalance and high pelvic incidence. The preoperative sagittal C7 plumb was more positive (67.9 mm) in the decompensation group than in the balance group (37.0 mm) (P = 0.002). There was a significant difference in pelvic incidence between 61.7° in the decompensation and 54.9° in the balance group (P = 0.01). The preoperative lumbar lordosis was hypolordotic in the decompensation group, however, it was not found to be a risk factor. Pseudarthrosis was identified at the lumbosacral junction in 5 patients, and 4 of them (80%) had SD. SD developed in 55% of patients who had loosening of the distal screws and 50% of patients with hypolordotic lumbar fusion. Distal adjacent segment disease was more likely to cause SD than proximal adjacent segment disease.

Conclusion. Sagittal decompensation is common after long posterior instrumentation and fusion for degenerative lumbar scoliosis. It is mostly associated with complications at the distal segments, including pseudarthrosis and implant failure at the lumbosacral junction. Restoration of optimal lumbar lordosis and secure lumbosacral fixation is necessary especially in patients with preoperative sagittal imbalance and high pelvic incidence in order to prevent sagittal decompensation after surgery. Key words: adult spinal deformity, degenerative lumbar scoliosis, sagittal imbalance, sagittal decompensation, risk factor

Proudly powered by WordPress