Literature DB >> 22596038

Impact of magnitude and percentage of global sagittal plane correction on health-related quality of life at 2-years follow-up.

Benjamin Blondel1, Frank Schwab, Benjamin Ungar, Justin Smith, Keith Bridwell, Steven Glassman, Christopher Shaffrey, Jean-Pierre Farcy, Virginie Lafage.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Sagittal plane malalignment has been established as the main radiographic driver of disability in adult spinal deformity (ASD).
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the amount of sagittal correction needed for a patient to perceive improvement (minimal clinically important difference, MCID) in health-related quality of life (HRQOL) scores.
METHODS: This was a multicenter, retrospective analysis of prospectively consecutively enrolled ASD patients. Inclusion criterion was a sagittal vertical axis (SVA) >80 mm. Demographic, radiographic, and HRQOL preoperative and 2-year postsurgery data were collected. Surgical treatment was categorized based on SVA correction: <60 mm, 60 mm to 120 mm, and >120 mm. Changes in parameters were analyzed using paired t test, 1-way analysis of variance, and χ2 test.
RESULTS: Seventy-six patients (preoperative SVA = 140 mm) were analyzed; each subgroup revealed significant HRQOL improvements following surgery. Compared with the <60 mm correction group, the likelihood of reaching MCID was significantly improved for the >120 mm group (Oswestry Disability Index) but not for the 60 mm to 120 mm group. A significantly greater likelihood of reaching MCID thresholds was observed for corrections above 66% of preoperative SVA.
CONCLUSION: Best HRQOL outcomes for ASD patients with severe sagittal plane deformity were obtained with a correction >120 mm for SVA and at least 66% of correction. Although lesser amounts of SVA correction yielded clinical improvement, the rate of MCID threshold improvement was not significantly different for mild or modest corrections. These results underline the need for complete sagittal plane deformity correction if high rates of HRQOL benefit are sought for patients with marked sagittal plane deformity.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22596038     DOI: 10.1227/NEU.0b013e31825d20c0

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Neurosurgery        ISSN: 0148-396X            Impact factor:   4.654


  32 in total

1.  Volume and fat infiltration of spino-pelvic musculature in adults with spinal deformity.

Authors:  Bertrand Moal; Nicolas Bronsard; José G Raya; Jean Marc Vital; Frank Schwab; Wafa Skalli; Virginie Lafage
Journal:  World J Orthop       Date:  2015-10-18

2.  Likelihood of reaching minimal clinically important difference in adult spinal deformity: a comparison of operative and nonoperative treatment.

Authors:  Shian Liu; Frank Schwab; Justin S Smith; Eric Klineberg; Christopher P Ames; Gregory Mundis; Richard Hostin; Khaled Kebaish; Vedat Deviren; Munish Gupta; Oheneba Boachie-Adjei; Robert A Hart; Shay Bess; Virginie Lafage
Journal:  Ochsner J       Date:  2014

3.  Factors influencing spinal sagittal balance, bone mineral density, and Oswestry Disability Index outcome measures in patients with rheumatoid arthritis.

Authors:  Kazutaka Masamoto; Bungo Otsuki; Shunsuke Fujibayashi; Koichiro Shima; Hiromu Ito; Moritoshi Furu; Motomu Hashimoto; Masao Tanaka; Stephen Lyman; Hiroyuki Yoshitomi; Shimei Tanida; Tsuneyo Mimori; Shuichi Matsuda
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2017-11-28       Impact factor: 3.134

Review 4.  Minimally invasive versus open surgery for the correction of adult degenerative scoliosis: a systematic review.

Authors:  Asad M Lak; Nayan Lamba; Farrah Pompilus; Ismaeel Yunusa; Andrella King; Ihtisham Sultan; James Amamoo; Nawaf M Al-Otaibi; Mohammed Alasmari; Iman Zaghloul; Linda Aglio; Christian D Cerecedo-Lopez; Ian Tafel; Timothy R Smith; Rania A Mekary; Hasan Zaidi
Journal:  Neurosurg Rev       Date:  2020-03-12       Impact factor: 3.042

Review 5.  Proximal junctional kyphosis and failure-diagnosis, prevention, and treatment.

Authors:  Ngoc-Lam M Nguyen; Christopher Y Kong; Robert A Hart
Journal:  Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med       Date:  2016-09

Review 6.  Classification in Brief: SRS-Schwab Classification of Adult Spinal Deformity.

Authors:  Casey Slattery; Kushagra Verma
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2018-09       Impact factor: 4.176

Review 7.  [What is actually adult spinal deformity? : Development, classification, and indications for surgical treatment].

Authors:  D Adler; H Almansour; M Akbar
Journal:  Orthopade       Date:  2018-04       Impact factor: 1.087

8.  Correlation between the apex of lumbar lordosis and pelvic incidence in asymptomatic adult.

Authors:  Changyu Pan; Guodong Wang; Jianmin Sun
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2019-10-19       Impact factor: 3.134

9.  Evaluation of complications and neurological deficits with three-column spine reconstructions for complex spinal deformity: a retrospective Scoli-RISK-1 study.

Authors:  Michael P Kelly; Lawrence G Lenke; Christopher I Shaffrey; Christopher P Ames; Leah Y Carreon; Virginie Lafage; Justin S Smith; Adam L Shimer
Journal:  Neurosurg Focus       Date:  2014-05       Impact factor: 4.047

10.  Sagittal balance and spinopelvic parameters after lateral lumbar interbody fusion for degenerative scoliosis: a case-control study.

Authors:  Yaser M K Baghdadi; A Noelle Larson; Mark B Dekutoski; Quanqi Cui; Arjun S Sebastian; Bryan M Armitage; Ahmad Nassr
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2014-02-01       Impact factor: 3.468

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.