Although patients with cervical kyphosis are not ideal candidates for cervical disc arthroplasty (CDA), there is a paucity of data on patients with a straight or slightly lordotic neck.
OBJECTIVE: To correlate cervical lordosis, T1-slope, and clinical outcomes of CDA.
METHODS: The study retrospectively analyzed 95 patients who underwent 1-level CDA and had 2-yr follow-up. They were divided into a high T1-slope (≥28◦) group (HTSG,n=45) and a low T1-slope (<28◦) group (LTSG, n = 50). Cervical spinal alignment parameters, including T1-slope, cervical lordosis (C2-7 Cobb angle), and segmental mobility (range of motion [ROM]) at the indexed level, were compared. The clinical outcomes were also assessed.
RESULTS: The mean T1-slope was 28.1 ± 7.0◦. After CDA, the pre- and postoperative segmental motility remained similar and cervical lordosis was preserved. All the clinical outcomes improved after CDA. The HTSG were similar to the LTSG in age, sex, segmental mobility, and clinical outcomes. However, the HTSG had higher cervical lordosis than the LTSG. Furthermore, the LTSG had increased cervical lordosis (C2-7 Cobb angle), whereas the HTSG had decreased lordosis after CDA. Patients of the LTSG, who had more improvement in cervical lordosis, had a trend toward increasing segmental mobility at the index level (ROM) than the HTSG.
CONCLUSION: In this series, T1-slope correlated well with global cervical lordosis but did not affect the segmental mobility. After CDA, the changes in cervical lordosis correlated with changes in segmental mobility. Therefore, segmental lordosis should be cautiously preserved during CDA as it could determine the mobility of the disc.
For laminectomy and posterior spinal fusion (LPSF) surgery for cervical spondyloticmyelopathy (CSM), the evidence is unclear as to whether fusions should cross the cervicothoracic junction (CTJ). OBJECTIVE: To compare LPSF outcomes between those with and without lower instrumented vertebrae (LIV) crossing the CTJ.
METHODS: A consecutive series of adults undergoing LPSF for CSM from 2012 to 2018 with a minimum of 12-mo follow-up were identified. LPSF with subaxial upper instrumented vertebrae and LIV between C6 and T2 were included. Clinical and radiographic outcomes were compared.
RESULTS: A total of 79 patients were included: 46 crossed the CTJ (crossed-CTJ) and 33 did not. The mean follow-up was 22.2 mo (minimum: 12 mo). Crossed-CTJ had higher preoperative C2-7 sagittal vertical axis (cSVA) (33.3 ± 16.0 vs 23.8 ± 12.4 mm, P = .01) but similar preoperative cervical lordosis (CL) and CL minus T1-slope (CL minus T1-slope) (P > .05, both comparisons). The overall reoperation rate was 3.8% (crossed-CTJ: 2.2% vs notcrossed: 6.1%, P=.37). In adjusted analyses, crossed-CTJ was associated with superior cSVA (β = –9.7; P = .002), CL (β = 6.2; P = .04), and CL minus T1-slope (β = –6.6; P = .04), but longer operative times (β = 46.3; P = .001). Crossed- and not-crossed CTJ achieved similar postoperative patient-reported outcomes [Visual Analog Scale (VAS) neck pain, VAS arm pain, Nurick Grade, Modified Japanese Orthopedic Association Scale, Neck Disability Index, and EuroQol-5D] in adjusted multivariable analyses (adjusted P > .05). For the entire cohort, higher postoperative CL was associated with lower postoperative arm pain (adjusted Pearson’s r –0.1, P=.02). No postoperative cervical radiographic parameters were associated with neck pain (P > .05).
CONCLUSION: Subaxial LPSF for CSM that crossed the CTJ were associated with superior radiographic outcomes for cSVA, CL, and CL minus T1-slope, but longer operative times. There were no differences in neck pain or reoperation rate.
Cervical alignment has become increasingly important in the planning of spine surgery. A relationship between the slope of T1 (T1S), the cervical lordosis (CL), and the overall cervical sagittal vertical axis (cSVA) has previously been demonstrated, but the exact nature of this relationship is poorly understood. In this study, we derive theoretical and empirical equations to better understand how T1S and CL affect cSVA. The first equation was developed on a theoretical basis using inherent trigonometric relationships of the cervical spine. By treating the cervical spine as the arc of a circumference, and by taking into account the cervical height (CH), the geometric relationship between theT1S, CL, and cSVA was described via a trigonometric identity utilizing a novel angle δ subtended by the CH and cSVA (δ = T1S-CL/2). The second equation was developed on an empiric basis by performing a multiple linear regression on data obtained from a retrospective review of a large multicenter deformity database. The theoretical equation determined that the value of cSVA could be expressed as: cSVA = CH ∗ tan(π/180 ∗ (T 1S −CL/2)) . The empirical equation determined that value of cSVA could be expressed as: cSVA = (1.1 ∗ T 1) −(0.43 ∗ CL) + 6.69. In both, the sagittal alignment of the head over the shoulders is directly proportional to the T1S and inversely proportional to CL/2. These 2 equations may allow surgeons to better understand how the CL compensates for the T1S, to accurately predict the postoperative cSVA, and to customize cervical interbody grafts by taking into consideration each individual patient’s specific cervical spine parameters.
The goals of cervical deformity surgery include deformity correction, restoration of horizontal gaze, decompression of neural elements, spinal stabilization with a biomechanically sound construct, and meticulous arthrodesis technique to prevent pseudoarthrosis and minimizing surgical complications.
Many different surgical options exist, but selecting the correct approach that ensures the optimal clinical outcome can be challenging and often controversial. In this last part of the cervical deformity review series, various posterior deformity correction techniques are discussed in detail, along with an overview of surgical outcome and postoperative complications.
A sound operative plan based on solid understanding of the pathology and biomechanics is the most important part of cervical deformity correction.
Many different surgical options exist for operative management of cervical spine deformities. However, selecting the correct approach that ensures the optimal clinical outcome can be challenging and often controversial.
In Part 2 of this three-part review series, we discuss the pre-operative planning, management algorithm, and anterior surgical techniques for cervical deformity correction.
Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) is one of the most commonly performed spine procedures. It can be used to correct cervical kyphotic deformity, which is the most common cervical deformity, and is often performed using lordotic interbody devices. Worsening of the cervical sagittal parameters is associated with decreased health-related quality of life. The study hypothesis is that through the use of machined lordotic allografts in ACDF, segmental and overall cervical lordosis can be maintained or increased, which will have a positive impact on overall cervical sagittal alignment.
Methods: Seventy-four cases of 1-level ACDF (ACDF1) and 2-level ACDF (ACDF2) (40 ACDF1 and 34 ACDF2 procedures) were retrospectively reviewed. Upright neutral lateral radiographs were assessed preoperatively and at 6 weeks and 1 year postoperatively. The measured radiographic parameters included focal lordosis, disc height, C2–7 lordosis, C1–7 lordosis, T-1 slope, and C2–7 sagittal vertical axis. Correlation coefficients were calculated to determine the relationships between these radiographic measurements.
Results: The mean values were as follows: preoperative focal lordosis was 0.574°, disc height was 4.48 mm, C2–7 lordosis was 9.66°, C1–7 lordosis was 42.5°, cervical sagittal vertebral axis (SVA) was 26.9 mm, and the T-1 slope was 33.2°. Cervical segmental lordosis significantly increased by 6.31° at 6 weeks and 6.45° at 1 year. C2–7 lordosis significantly improved by 1 year with a mean improvement of 3.46°. There was a significant positive correlation between the improvement in segmental lordosis and overall cervical lordosis. Overall cervical lordosis was significantly negatively correlated with cervical SVA. Improved segmental lordosis was not correlated with cervical SVA in ACDF1 patients but was significantly negatively correlated in ACDF2 patients. There was also a significant positive correlation between the T-1 slope and cervical SVA.
Conclusions In the study population, the improvement of focal lordosis was significantly correlated with an improvement in overall lordosis (C1–7 and C2–7), and overall lordosis as measured by the C2–7 Cobb angle was significantly negatively correlated with cervical SVA. Using lordotic cervical allografts, we successfully created and maintained significant improvement in cervical segmental lordosis at the 6-week and 1-year time points with values of 6.31° and 6.45°, respectively. ACDF is able to achieve statistically significant improvement in C2–7 cervical lordosis by the 1-year followup, with a mean improvement of 3.46°. Increasing the number of levels operated on resulted in improved cervical sagittal parameters. This establishes a baseline for further examination into the ability of multilevel ACDF to achieve cervical deformity correction through the intervertebral correction of lordosis.
You must be logged in to post a comment.