Literature DB >> 28106523

Influence of postoperative sagittal balance and spinopelvic parameters on the outcome of patients surgically treated for degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis.

Ingrid Radovanovic1,2, Jennifer C Urquhart3,2, Venkat Ganapathy1,2, Fawaz Siddiqi1,3,2, Kevin R Gurr1,3,2, Stewart I Bailey1,3,2, Christopher S Bailey1,3,2.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE The object of this study was to determine the association between postoperative sagittal spinopelvic alignment and patient-rated outcome measures following decompression and fusion for lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis. METHODS The authors identified a consecutive series of patients who had undergone surgery for lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis between 2008 and 2012, with an average follow-up of 3 years (range 1-6 years). Surgery was performed to address the clinical symptoms of spinal stenosis, not global sagittal alignment. Sagittal alignment was only assessed postoperatively. Patients were divided into 2 groups based on a postoperative sagittal vertical axis (SVA) < 50 mm (well aligned) or ≥ 50 mm (poorly aligned). Baseline demographic, procedure, and outcome measures were compared between the groups. Postoperative outcome measures and postoperative spinopelvic parameters were compared between groups using analysis of covariance. RESULTS Of the 84 patients included in this study, 46.4% had an SVA < 50 mm. Multiple levels of spondylolisthesis (p = 0.044), spondylolisthesis at the L3-4 level (p = 0.046), and multiple levels treated with fusion (p = 0.028) were more common among patients in the group with an SVA ≥ 50 mm. Patients with an SVA ≥ 50 mm had a worse SF-36 physical component summary (PCS) score (p = 0.018), a worse Oswestry Disability Index (ODI; p = 0.043), and more back pain (p = 0.039) than those with an SVA < 50 mm after controlling for multiple levels of spondylolisthesis and multilevel fusion. The spinopelvic parameters differing between the < 50-mm and ≥ 50-mm groups included lumbar lordosis (LL; 56.4° ± 4.7° vs 49.8° ± 4.3°, respectively, p = 0.040) and LL < pelvic incidence ± 9° (51% vs 23.1%, respectively, p = 0.013) after controlling for type of surgical procedure. CONCLUSIONS Data in this study revealed that patient-rated outcome is influenced by the overall postoperative sagittal balance as defined by the SVA.

Entities:  

Keywords:  HRQOL = health-related quality of life; ICC = intraclass correlation coefficient; LL = lumbar lordosis; MCS = mental component summary; NRS = numeric rating scale; ODI = Oswestry Disability Index; PCS = physical component summary; PI = pelvic incidence; PT = pelvic tilt; SS = sacral slope; SVA = sagittal vertical axis; TK = thoracic kyphosis; ZCQ = Zurich Claudication Questionnaire; degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis; health-related quality of life; radiographic parameters; spinopelvic parameter; vertical sagittal balance

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28106523     DOI: 10.3171/2016.9.SPINE1680

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Neurosurg Spine        ISSN: 1547-5646


  10 in total

Review 1.  Treatment for Degenerative Lumbar Spondylolisthesis: Current Concepts and New Evidence.

Authors:  Andre M Samuel; Harold G Moore; Matthew E Cunningham
Journal:  Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med       Date:  2017-12

2.  Improvements in Back and Leg Pain Following a Minimally Invasive Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion.

Authors:  Dustin H Massel; Benjamin C Mayo; Ankur S Narain; Fady Y Hijji; Philip K Louie; Nathaniel W Jenkins; James M Parrish; Kern Singh
Journal:  Int J Spine Surg       Date:  2020-10

3.  Lumbar spinal fusion of low-grade degenerative spondylolisthesis (Meyerding grade I and II): Do reduction and correction of the radiological sagittal parameters correlate with better clinical outcome?

Authors:  Stavros Oikonomidis; Carolin Meyer; Max Joseph Scheyerer; David Grevenstein; Peer Eysel; Jan Bredow
Journal:  Arch Orthop Trauma Surg       Date:  2019-11-16       Impact factor: 3.067

4.  How does spinopelvic alignment influence short-term clinical outcomes after lumbar fusion in patients with single-level degenerative spondylolisthesis?

Authors:  Stephen DiMaria; Brian A Karamian; Mark J Lambrechts; Arun P Kanhere; John J Mangan; Winston W Yen; Arlene Maheu; Mahir A Qureshi; Jose A Canseco; David I Kaye; Barrett I Woods; Mark F Kurd; Kris E Radcliff; Alan S Hilibrand; Christopher K Kepler; Alexander R Vaccaro; Gregory D Schroeder
Journal:  J Craniovertebr Junction Spine       Date:  2022-09-14

5.  Relationships between Paraspinal Muscle and Spinopelvic Sagittal Balance in Patients with Lumbar Spinal Stenosis.

Authors:  Wei Wang; Zhuoran Sun; Weishi Li; Zhongqiang Chen
Journal:  Orthop Surg       Date:  2022-04-27       Impact factor: 2.279

6.  The Association Between Sagittal Spinopelvic Alignment and Persistent Low Back Pain After Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion for Treatment of Mild L5-S1 Spondylolisthesis: A Retrospective Study.

Authors:  Jian-Jun Yuan; Guang Li; Yan Liu; Quan Zhang; Zhi-Shuai Ren; Rong Tian
Journal:  Int J Gen Med       Date:  2022-05-10

7.  The influence of sagittal spinopelvic alignment on patient discharge disposition following minimally invasive lumbar interbody fusion.

Authors:  Mohamed Macki; Hassan A Fadel; Travis Hamilton; Seokchun Lim; Lara W Massie; Hesham Mostafa Zakaria; Jacob Pawloski; Victor Chang
Journal:  J Spine Surg       Date:  2021-03

8.  Management of symptomatic degenerative low-grade lumbar spondylolisthesis.

Authors:  Nick Evans; Michael McCarthy
Journal:  EFORT Open Rev       Date:  2018-12-19

9.  The Reliability of CT Scan Measurements of Pelvic Incidence in the Evaluation of Adult Spondylolisthesis.

Authors:  Jinhui Shi; Swamy Kurra; Michael Danaher; Frank Bailey; Katherine H Sullivan; William Lavelle
Journal:  Cureus       Date:  2022-01-28

10.  Global Sagittal Alignment and Clinical Outcomes after 1-3 Short-Segment Lumbar Fusion in Degenerative Spinal Diseases.

Authors:  Yung-Hun Youn; Kyu-Jung Cho; Yeop Na; Jeong-Seok Kim
Journal:  Asian Spine J       Date:  2021-09-28
  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.