Literature DB >> 29248781

Drivers of Cervical Deformity Have a Strong Influence on Achieving Optimal Radiographic and Clinical Outcomes at 1 Year After Cervical Deformity Surgery.

Peter G Passias1, Cole Bortz2, Samantha Horn2, Frank Segreto2, Gregory Poorman2, Cyrus Jalai2, Alan Daniels3, D Kojo Hamilton4, Han Jo Kim5, Daniel Sciubba6, Justin S Smith7, Brian Neuman6, Christopher Shaffrey7, Virginie Lafage5, Renaud Lafage5, Themistocles Protopsaltis2, Christopher Ames8, Robert Hart9, Gregory Mundis10, Robert Eastlack11.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The primary driver (PD) of cervical malalignment is important in characterizing cervical deformity (CD) and should be included in fusion to achieve alignment and quality-of-life goals. This study aims to define how PDs improve understanding of the mechanisms of CD and assesses the impact of driver region on realignment/outcomes.
METHODS: Inclusion: radiographic CD, age >18 years, 1 year follow-up. PD apex was classified by spinal region: cervical, cervicothoracic junction (CTJ), thoracic, or spinopelvic by a panel of spine deformity surgeons. Primary analysis evaluated PD groups meeting alignment goals (by Ames modifiers cervical sagittal vertical axis/T1 slope minus cervical lordosis/chin-brow vergical angle/modified Japanese Orthopaedics Association questionnaire) and health-related quality of life (HRQL) goals (EuroQol-5 Dimensions questionnaire/Neck Disability Index/modified Japanese Orthopaedics Association questionnaire) using t tests. Secondary analysis grouped interventions by fusion constructs including the primary or secondary apex based on lowest instrumented vertebra: cervical, lowest instrumented vertebra (LIV) ≤C7; CTJ, LIV ≤T3; and thoracic, LIV ≤T12.
RESULTS: A total of 73 patients (mean age, 61.8 years; 59% female) were evaluated with the following PDs of their sagittal cervical deformity: cervical, 49.3%; CTJ, 31.5%; thoracic, 13.7%; and spinopelvic, 2.7%. Cervical drivers (n = 36) showed the greatest 1-year postoperative cervical and global alignment changes (improvement in T1S, CL, C0-C2, C1 slope). Thoracic drivers were more likely to have persistent severe T1 slope minus cervical lordosis modifier grade at 1 year (0, 20.0%; +, 0.0%; ++, 80.0%). Cervical deformity modifiers tended to improve in cervical patients whose construct included the PD apex (included, 26%; not, 0%; P = 0.068). Thoracic and cervicothoracic PD apex patients did not improve in HRQL goals when PD apex was not treated.
CONCLUSIONS: CD structural drivers have an important effect on treatment and 1-year postoperative outcomes. Cervical or thoracic drivers not included in the construct result in residual deformity and inferior HRQL goals. These factors should be considered when discussing treatment plans for patients with CD.
Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Alignment; Cervical deformity; Cervical spine; Outcomes; Primary driver; Surgical correction

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 29248781     DOI: 10.1016/j.wneu.2017.12.024

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  World Neurosurg        ISSN: 1878-8750            Impact factor:   2.104


  5 in total

1.  The impact of osteotomy grade and location on regional and global alignment following cervical deformity surgery.

Authors:  Peter G Passias; Samantha R Horn; Tina Raman; Avery E Brown; Virginie Lafage; Renaud Lafage; Justin S Smith; Cole A Bortz; Frank A Segreto; Katherine E Pierce; Haddy Alas; Breton G Line; Bassel G Diebo; Alan H Daniels; Han Jo Kim; Alex Soroceanu; Gregory M Mundis; Themistocles S Protopsaltis; Eric O Klineberg; Douglas C Burton; Robert A Hart; Frank J Schwab; Shay Bess; Christopher I Shaffrey; Christopher P Ames
Journal:  J Craniovertebr Junction Spine       Date:  2019 Jul-Sep

2.  Risk-benefit assessment of major versus minor osteotomies for flexible and rigid cervical deformity correction.

Authors:  Peter Gust Passias; Lara Passfall; Samantha R Horn; Katherine E Pierce; Virginie Lafage; Renaud Lafage; Justin S Smith; Breton G Line; Gregory M Mundis; Robert Eastlack; Bassel G Diebo; Themistocles S Protopsaltis; Han Jo Kim; Justin Scheer; Douglas C Burton; Robert A Hart; Frank J Schwab; Shay Bess; Christopher P Ames; Christopher I Shaffrey
Journal:  J Craniovertebr Junction Spine       Date:  2021-09-08

3.  The impact of the lower instrumented level on outcomes in cervical deformity surgery.

Authors:  Peter Gust Passias; Haddy Alas; Katherine E Pierce; Matthew Galetta; Oscar Krol; Lara Passfall; Nicholas Kummer; Sara Naessig; Waleed Ahmad; Bassel G Diebo; Renaud Lafage; Virginie Lafage
Journal:  J Craniovertebr Junction Spine       Date:  2021-09-08

4.  What are the major drivers of outcomes in cervical deformity surgery?

Authors:  Peter Gust Passias; Katherine E Pierce; Brandon Passano; Muhammad B Tariq; Salman Ahmad; Vivek Singh; Stephane Owusu-Sarpong; Oscar Krol; Bailey Imbo; Lara Passfall; Peter Tretiakov; Tyler Williamson; Rachel Joujon-Roche; Waleed Ahmad; Sara Naessig; Bassel Diebo
Journal:  J Craniovertebr Junction Spine       Date:  2021-12-11

5.  What are the major drivers of outcomes in cervical deformity surgery?

Authors:  Peter Gust Passias; Katherine E Pierce; Bailey Imbo; Oscar Krol; Lara Passfall; Peter Tretiakov; Kevin Moattari; Tyler Williamson; Rachel Joujon-Roche; Brandon Passano; Waleed Ahmad; Sara Naessig; Bassel Diebo
Journal:  J Craniovertebr Junction Spine       Date:  2021-12-11
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.