Akira Iwata1,2, Masahiro Kanayama3, Fumihiro Oha3, Tomoyuki Hashimoto3, Norimasa Iwasaki4. 1. Spine Center, Hakodate Central General Hospital, Hon-cho 33-2, Hakodate, Hokkaido, 040-8585, Japan. iwataakira0126@yahoo.co.jp. 2. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Hokkaido University School of Medicine, N15 W7 Kita-Ward, Sapporo, Hokkaido, 060-8638, Japan. iwataakira0126@yahoo.co.jp. 3. Spine Center, Hakodate Central General Hospital, Hon-cho 33-2, Hakodate, Hokkaido, 040-8585, Japan. 4. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Hokkaido University School of Medicine, N15 W7 Kita-Ward, Sapporo, Hokkaido, 060-8638, Japan.
Abstract
PURPOSE: In the healing of osteoporotic vertebral fracture, global spinal mal-alignment might increase the load sharing at the fracture site and deteriorate the fracture healing. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of spinopelvic alignment on the union status of thoracolumbar osteoporosis-related vertebral compression fracture (OVCF). METHODS:Consecutive 48 patients with a single-level thoracolumbar fresh OVCF were treated non-operatively. Union was judged by three independent observers at 6 months, and patients were divided into union group and non-union group. Spinopelvic alignment was measured using upright whole spine radiograph before treatment as follows: pelvic incidence (PI), pelvic tilt (PT), lumbar lordosis (LL), thoracic kyphosis (TK), sagittal vertical axis (SVA), and DSVA, defined as the distance from a plumb line dropped from the center of the C7 body to the center of fractured vertebral body. RESULT: Global spinal alignment was different in union group and non-union group: SVA (4.7 ± 0.7 cm in union group vs. 8.9 ± 1.3 cm in non-union group, P = 0.007), DSVA (4.2 ± 0.6 cm in union group vs. 9.5 ± 1.0 cm in non-union group, P < 0.001), and PI-LL (18.9° ± 2.2° in union group vs. 30.3° ± 3.9° in non-union group, P = 0.014). Over 5 cm of DSVA [P = 0.022, adjusted odds 7.9 (95 % CI 1.3-77.0)] and/or over 30° of PI-LL [P = 0.026, adjusted odds 6.6 (95 % CI 1.5-44.2)] showed the significant risk factors for non-union using multivariate logistic regression analysis in the other background status. CONCLUSIONS: Global spinal mal-alignment, showing over 5 cm of DSVA and/or over 30° of PI-LL, affected the union status of OVCF.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: In the healing of osteoporotic vertebral fracture, global spinal mal-alignment might increase the load sharing at the fracture site and deteriorate the fracture healing. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of spinopelvic alignment on the union status of thoracolumbar osteoporosis-related vertebral compression fracture (OVCF). METHODS: Consecutive 48 patients with a single-level thoracolumbar fresh OVCF were treated non-operatively. Union was judged by three independent observers at 6 months, and patients were divided into union group and non-union group. Spinopelvic alignment was measured using upright whole spine radiograph before treatment as follows: pelvic incidence (PI), pelvic tilt (PT), lumbar lordosis (LL), thoracic kyphosis (TK), sagittal vertical axis (SVA), and DSVA, defined as the distance from a plumb line dropped from the center of the C7 body to the center of fractured vertebral body. RESULT: Global spinal alignment was different in union group and non-union group: SVA (4.7 ± 0.7 cm in union group vs. 8.9 ± 1.3 cm in non-union group, P = 0.007), DSVA (4.2 ± 0.6 cm in union group vs. 9.5 ± 1.0 cm in non-union group, P < 0.001), and PI-LL (18.9° ± 2.2° in union group vs. 30.3° ± 3.9° in non-union group, P = 0.014). Over 5 cm of DSVA [P = 0.022, adjusted odds 7.9 (95 % CI 1.3-77.0)] and/or over 30° of PI-LL [P = 0.026, adjusted odds 6.6 (95 % CI 1.5-44.2)] showed the significant risk factors for non-union using multivariate logistic regression analysis in the other background status. CONCLUSIONS: Global spinal mal-alignment, showing over 5 cm of DSVA and/or over 30° of PI-LL, affected the union status of OVCF.
Entities:
Keywords:
DSVA; Osteoporotic vertebral fracture; Risk factors; Spinopelvic alignment; Union status
Authors: Frank Schwab; Benjamin Ungar; Benjamin Blondel; Jacob Buchowski; Jeffrey Coe; Donald Deinlein; Christopher DeWald; Hossein Mehdian; Christopher Shaffrey; Clifford Tribus; Virginie Lafage Journal: Spine (Phila Pa 1976) Date: 2012-05-20 Impact factor: 3.468
Authors: Andrew M Briggs; Tim V Wrigley; Jaap H van Dieën; Bev Phillips; Sing Kai Lo; Alison M Greig; Kim L Bennell Journal: Eur Spine J Date: 2006-07-04 Impact factor: 3.134
Authors: Ioannis P Pappou; Elias C Papadopoulos; Andrew N Swanson; Frank P Cammisa; Federico P Girardi Journal: Orthopedics Date: 2008-01 Impact factor: 1.390
Authors: Max J Scheyerer; Ulrich J A Spiegl; Sebastian Grueninger; Frank Hartmann; Sebastian Katscher; Georg Osterhoff; Mario Perl; Matthias Pumberger; Gregor Schmeiser; Bernhard W Ullrich; Klaus J Schnake Journal: Global Spine J Date: 2021-02-05