Literature DB >> 27146808

Optimal chin-brow vertical angle for sagittal visual fields in ankylosing spondylitis kyphosis.

Kai Song1, Xiaojing Su1, Yonggang Zhang1, Chao Liu1, Xiangyu Tang1, Guoying Zhang1, Guoquan Zheng1, Geng Cui1, Xuesong Zhang1, Keya Mao1, Zheng Wang2, Yan Wang1.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Chin-brow vertical angle (CBVA) is very important in correction of thoracolumbar kyphotic deformity in ankylosing spondylitis (AS), especially for the patients with cervical ankylosis. In previous study, Suk et al. stated that the patients with CBVA between -10° and 10° had better horizontal gaze. Unfortunately, in our clinical practice, we found the patients with CBVA between -10° and 10° after surgery usually complained of difficulty in cooking, cleaning, desk working and the like, although they had excellent horizontal gaze. In other words, for the patients with cervical ankylosis, good horizontal gaze existed together with poor downward gaze. Then, which condition do the patients prefer? Is there a compromise solution that makes a better quality life possible for the patients? In this research, we studied AS patients with cervical ankylosis, aiming to investigate the optimal CBVA for deformity correction.
METHODS: 25 AS thoracolumbar kyphotic patients with cervical ankylosis were studied, whose function and expectation of visual field related to life quality were assessed by questionnaire before and after surgery. Pre- and post-operative CBVA were obtained on lateral photos of the patients with free-standing posture, and 50 cases of CBVA were included, which were divided into six groups according to the angle irrespective of surgery (Group A, CBVA <0°; Group B, 0° ≤ CBVA < 10°; Group C, 10° ≤ CBVA < 20°; Group D, 20° ≤ CBVA < 30°; Group E, 30° ≤ CBVA < 40°; Group F, CBVA ≥ 40°). Kruskal-Wallis test was used to assess all the groups in terms of various items in the questionnaire, while Mann-Whitney test was used to assess every two groups.
RESULTS: In overall evaluation, Group C (10°-20°) obtained the optimal expectation (p < 0.05); Group B, C and D (0°-30°) obtained better function (p < 0.05), and there was no significant difference between the 3 groups. In appearance, Group A, B and C (<20°) were better than the other groups both in function and expectation (p < 0.05), without dramatic difference among the three groups. In outdoor activities, Group A, B, C and D (<30°) were better in most of the items (p < 0.05). In indoor activities, Group C and D (10-30°) were much better (p < 0.05).
CONCLUSION: AS thoracolumbar kyphotic patients with cervical ankylosis had the best satisfaction when 10° ≤ CBVA < 20°.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Ankylosing spondylitis; Chin-brow vertical angle; Hilus pulmonis; Quality of life; Visual field

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27146808     DOI: 10.1007/s00586-016-4588-z

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Spine J        ISSN: 0940-6719            Impact factor:   3.134


  19 in total

Review 1.  Lumbar osteotomy for correction of thoracolumbar kyphotic deformity in ankylosing spondylitis. A structured review of three methods of treatment.

Authors:  B J Van Royen; A De Gast
Journal:  Ann Rheum Dis       Date:  1999-07       Impact factor: 19.103

Review 2.  Interpretation of plain chest roentgenogram.

Authors:  Suhail Raoof; David Feigin; Arthur Sung; Sabiha Raoof; Lavanya Irugulpati; Edward C Rosenow
Journal:  Chest       Date:  2012-02       Impact factor: 9.410

3.  Two-level pedicle subtraction osteotomy for severe thoracolumbar kyphotic deformity in ankylosing spondylitis.

Authors:  Hong Qi Zhang; Jia Huang; Chao Feng Guo; Shao Hua Liu; Ming Xing Tang
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2013-06-17       Impact factor: 3.134

4.  Radiological analysis of ankylosing spondylitis patients with severe kyphosis before and after pedicle subtraction osteotomy.

Authors:  Romain Debarge; Guillaume Demey; Pierre Roussouly
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2009-09-11       Impact factor: 3.134

5.  A new method for calculating the exact angle required for spinal osteotomy.

Authors:  Kai Song; Guoquan Zheng; Yonggang Zhang; Xuesong Zhang; Keya Mao; Yan Wang
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2013-05-01       Impact factor: 3.468

6.  Surgery of the deformities in ankylosing spondylitis: our experience of lumbar osteotomies in 31 patients.

Authors:  J Y Lazennec; G Saillant; K Saidi; N Arafati; D Barabas; J P Benazet; C Laville; R Roy-Camille; S Ramaré
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  1997       Impact factor: 3.134

7.  Deformity planning for sagittal plane corrective osteotomies of the spine in ankylosing spondylitis.

Authors:  B J Van Royen; A De Gast; T H Smit
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2000-12       Impact factor: 3.134

8.  Gravity line analysis in adult volunteers: age-related correlation with spinal parameters, pelvic parameters, and foot position.

Authors:  Frank Schwab; Virginie Lafage; Reid Boyce; Wafa Skalli; Jean-Pierre Farcy
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2006-12-01       Impact factor: 3.468

Review 9.  Cervical spine alignment, sagittal deformity, and clinical implications: a review.

Authors:  Justin K Scheer; Jessica A Tang; Justin S Smith; Frank L Acosta; Themistocles S Protopsaltis; Benjamin Blondel; Shay Bess; Christopher I Shaffrey; Vedat Deviren; Virginie Lafage; Frank Schwab; Christopher P Ames
Journal:  J Neurosurg Spine       Date:  2013-06-14

10.  Hilus pulmonis as the center of gravity for AS thoracolumbar kyphosis.

Authors:  Kai Song; Guoquan Zheng; Yonggang Zhang; Geng Cui; Xuesong Zhang; Keya Mao; Yan Wang
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2013-12-31       Impact factor: 3.134

View more
  9 in total

1.  An innovative adjustable prone positioning frame for treatment of severe kyphosis secondary to ankylosing spondylitis with two-level osteotomy.

Authors:  Wei Zhang; Hai-Yang Yu; Hong-Liang Wang; Guo-Hui Zheng; Yun-Lei Zhai; Xi-Long Cui; Ji-Shi Jiang; Jian-Xiang Zhang; Cai-Liang Shen; Yichen Wang
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2021-06-12       Impact factor: 3.134

Review 2.  Osteotomies in ankylosing spondylitis: where, how many, and how much?

Authors:  Heiko Koller; Juliane Koller; Michael Mayer; Axel Hempfing; Wolfgang Hitzl
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2017-12-30       Impact factor: 3.134

Review 3.  Etiology and treatment of cervical kyphosis: state of the art review-a narrative review.

Authors:  Yoji Ogura; John R Dimar; Mladen Djurasovic; Leah Y Carreon
Journal:  J Spine Surg       Date:  2021-09

4.  Preoperative Planning and the Use of Free Available Software for Sagittal Plane Corrective Osteotomies of the Lumbar Spine in Ankylosing Spondylitis.

Authors:  Barend J van Royen
Journal:  Orthop Res Rev       Date:  2020-11-17

5.  Health-related quality of life in patients undergoing cervico-thoracic osteotomies for fixed cervico-thoracic kyphosis in patients with ankylosing spondylitis.

Authors:  Silviu Sabou; Hossein Mehdian; Dritan Pasku; Luca Boriani; Nasir A Quraishi
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2018-02-22       Impact factor: 3.134

6.  Can pelvic tilt be restored by spinal osteotomy in ankylosing spondylitis patients with thoracolumbar kyphosis? A minimum follow-up of 2 years.

Authors:  Tianhao Wang; Yongfei Zhao; Guoquan Zheng; Yao Wang; Chunguo Wang; Zheng Wang; Yan Wang
Journal:  J Orthop Surg Res       Date:  2018-07-09       Impact factor: 2.359

7.  Cervical Kyphosis.

Authors:  Akshay Gadia; Kunal Shah; Abhay Nene
Journal:  Asian Spine J       Date:  2018-10-18

8.  Cervical Spine Alignment in the Sagittal Axis: A Review of the Best Validated Measures in Clinical Practice.

Authors:  Michael L Martini; Sean N Neifert; Emily K Chapman; Thomas E Mroz; Jonathan J Rasouli
Journal:  Global Spine J       Date:  2020-11-18

9.  Optimal immediate sagittal alignment for kyphosis in ankylosing spondylitis following corrective osteotomy.

Authors:  Jianzhou Luo; Kai Yang; Zili Yang; Chaoshuai Feng; Xian Li; Zhenjuan Luo; Huiren Tao; Chunguang Duan; Tailin Wu
Journal:  Front Surg       Date:  2022-09-05
  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.