Literature DB >> 25862507

Magnitude of preoperative cervical lordotic compensation and C2-T3 angle are correlated to increased risk of postoperative sagittal spinal pelvic malalignment in adult thoracolumbar deformity patients at 2-year follow-up.

Peter G Passias1, Alexandra Soroceanu2, Justin Scheer3, Sun Yang4, Anthony Boniello4, Justin S Smith5, Themistocles Protopsaltis4, Han J Kim6, Frank Schwab4, Munish Gupta7, Eric Klineberg7, Gregory Mundis8, Renaud Lafage4, Robert Hart9, Christopher Shaffrey3, Virginie Lafage4, Christopher Ames10.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Cervical deformity (CD) is prevalent among patients with adult spinal deformity (ASD). The effect of baseline cervical alignment on achieving optimal thoracolumbar alignment in ASD surgery is unclear.
PURPOSE: This study assesses the relationship between preoperative (preop) cervical spinal parameters and global alignment after thoracolumbar ASD surgery at 2-year follow-up. STUDY DESIGN/
SETTING: This study is a retrospective review of a multicenter, prospective database. PATIENT SAMPLE: Surgical ASD patients with 2-year follow-up and cervical X-rays were included. OUTCOME MEASURES: The outcome measures were radiographic parameters and self-reported health-related quality-of-life measures (Short-Form 36 [SF-36], Oswestry Disability Index [ODI], and Scoliosis Research Society 22 [SRS-22]).
METHODS: Surgical ASD patients of 18 years and older with scoliosis greater than or equal to 20° and one of the following radiographic parameters were included: sagittal vertical axis (SVA) greater than or equal to 5 cm, pelvic tilt (PT) greater than or equal to 25°, or thoracic kyphosis (TK) greater than 60°. The SRS-Schwab sagittal modifiers (PT, global alignment, and pelvic incidence and lumbar lordosis [PI-LL]) were assessed at 2-year postoperatively as either normal ("0") or abnormal ("+" or "++"). Patients were classified in the aligned group (AG) or malaligned group (MG) at 2-year follow-up if all three sagittal modifiers were normal or abnormal, respectively. Patients were assessed for CD based on the following criteria: C2-C7 SVA greater than 4 cm, C2-C7 SVA less than 4 cm, cervical kyphosis (CL greater than 0), cervical lordosis (CL less than 0), any deformity (C2-C7 SVA greater than 4 cm or CL greater than 0), and both CD (C2-C7 SVA greater than 4 cm and CL greater than 0). Univariate testing was performed using t or chi-square test, looking at the following preop parameters: CD, C2-C7 SVA, C2-T3 SVA, CL, T1 slope (T1S), T1S-CL, C2-T3 angle, LL, TK, PT, C7-S1 SVA, and PI-LL.
RESULTS: One hundred four patients met the initial inclusion criteria with 70 in the AG and 34 in MG. Preoperative, patients in the MG had a higher CL (11.7 vs. 4.9, p=.03), higher C2-T3 angle (13.59 vs 4.9 p=.01), higher PT (p<.0001), higher SVA (p<.0001), and higher PI-LL (p<.0001) compared with the AG. Interestingly, the prevalence of CD at baseline was similar for both groups. There was no statistically significant difference among groups in the amount of improvement more than 2 years on the ODI or the Physical Component Summary of SF-36.
CONCLUSIONS: Patients with sagittal spinal malalignment associated with significant cervical compensatory lordosis are at increased risk of realignment failure at 2-year follow-up. Assessment of the degree of cervical compensation may be helpful in preop evaluation to assist in realignment outcome prediction.
Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Adult spinal deformity; Alignment; Cervical deformity; HRQOL; Outcome; Radiographic parameter

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25862507     DOI: 10.1016/j.spinee.2015.04.007

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Spine J        ISSN: 1529-9430            Impact factor:   4.166


  9 in total

1.  Is frailty responsive to surgical correction of adult spinal deformity? An investigation of sagittal re-alignment and frailty component drivers of postoperative frailty status.

Authors:  Peter G Passias; Frank A Segreto; Kevin A Moattari; Renaud Lafage; Justin S Smith; Breton G Line; Robert K Eastlack; Douglas C Burton; Robert A Hart; Shay Bess; Christopher I Shaffrey; Christopher P Ames; Virginie Lafage
Journal:  Spine Deform       Date:  2022-03-09

2.  Development of New-Onset Cervical Deformity in Nonoperative Adult Spinal Deformity Patients With 2-Year Follow-Up.

Authors:  Peter G Passias; Cyrus M Jalai; Nancy Worley; Shaleen Vira; Justin K Scheer; Justin S Smith; Subaraman Ramachandran; Alexandra Soroceanu; Samantha R Horn; Gregory W Poorman; Themistocles S Protopsaltis; Eric O Klineberg; Daniel M Sciubba; Han Jo Kim; D Kojo Hamilton; Renaud Lafage; Virginie Lafage; Christopher P Ames
Journal:  Int J Spine Surg       Date:  2018-12-21

3.  Toward the Development of a Comprehensive Clinically Oriented Patient Profile: A Systematic Review of the Purpose, Characteristic, and Methodological Quality of Classification Systems of Adult Spinal Deformity.

Authors:  Kenny Yat Hong Kwan; J Naresh-Babu; Wilco Jacobs; Marinus de Kleuver; David W Polly; Caglar Yilgor; Yabin Wu; Jong-Beom Park; Manabu Ito; Miranda L van Hooff
Journal:  Neurosurgery       Date:  2021-05-13       Impact factor: 4.654

4.  Global spinal deformity from the upper cervical perspective. What is "Abnormal" in the upper cervical spine?

Authors:  Peter G Passias; Haddy Alas; Renaud Lafage; Bassel G Diebo; Irene Chern; Christopher P Ames; Paul Park; Khoi D Than; Alan H Daniels; D Kojo Hamilton; Douglas C Burton; Robert A Hart; Shay Bess; Breton G Line; Eric O Klineberg; Christopher I Shaffrey; Justin S Smith; Frank J Schwab; Virginie Lafage
Journal:  J Craniovertebr Junction Spine       Date:  2019 Jul-Sep

5.  Prioritization of realignment associated with superior clinical outcomes for surgical cervical deformity patients.

Authors:  Katherine E Pierce; Peter Gust Passias; Avery E Brown; Cole A Bortz; Haddy Alas; Renaud Lafage; Oscar Krol; Dean Chou; Douglas C Burton; Breton Line; Eric Klineberg; Robert Hart; Jeffrey Gum; Alan Daniels; Kojo Hamilton; Shay Bess; Themistocles Protopsaltis; Christopher Shaffrey; Frank A Schwab; Justin S Smith; Virginie Lafage; Christopher Ames
Journal:  J Craniovertebr Junction Spine       Date:  2021-09-08

6.  Visualization of the Cervicothoracic Junction With EOS Imaging Is Superior to Conventional Lateral Cervical Radiographs.

Authors:  Brandon P Hirsch; Max Vaynrub; Matthew Siow; Anthony Zou; Utkarsh Anil; Dennis Vasquez Montes; Themistocles S Protopsaltis
Journal:  Global Spine J       Date:  2020-07-07

7.  Beyond Pelvic Incidence-Lumbar Lordosis Mismatch: The Importance of Assessing the Entire Spine to Achieve Global Sagittal Alignment.

Authors:  Robert K Merrill; Jun S Kim; Dante M Leven; Joung Heon Kim; Samuel K Cho
Journal:  Global Spine J       Date:  2017-04-20

8.  Diagnostic Value of T1 Slope in Degenerative Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy.

Authors:  Jin Sun; Hong-Wei Zhao; Jun-Jie Wang; Liang Xun; Na-Xin Fu; Hui Huang
Journal:  Med Sci Monit       Date:  2018-02-07

9.  Redefining cervical spine deformity classification through novel cutoffs: An assessment of the relationship between radiographic parameters and functional neurological outcomes.

Authors:  Peter Gust Passias; Katherine E Pierce; Avery E Brown; Cole A Bortz; Haddy Alas; Renaud Lafage; Virginie Lafage; Breton Line; Eric O Klineberg; Douglas C Burton; Robert Hart; Alan H Daniels; Shay Bess; Bassel Diebo; Themistocles Protopsaltis; Robert Eastlack; Christopher I Shaffrey; Frank J Schwab; Justin S Smith; Christopher Ames
Journal:  J Craniovertebr Junction Spine       Date:  2021-06-10
  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.