Literature DB >> 29462071

The Relationship Between Improvements in Myelopathy and Sagittal Realignment in Cervical Deformity Surgery Outcomes.

Peter Gust Passias1, Samantha R Horn1, Cole A Bortz1, Subaraman Ramachandran1, Douglas C Burton2, Themistocles Protopsaltis1, Renaud Lafage3, Virginie Lafage3, Bassel G Diebo4, Gregory W Poorman1, Frank A Segreto1, Justin S Smith5, Christopher Ames6, Christopher I Shaffrey5, Han Jo Kim3, Brian Neuman7, Alan H Daniels3, Alexandra Soroceanu8, Eric Klineberg9.   

Abstract

STUDY
DESIGN: Retrospective review.
OBJECTIVE: Determine whether alignment or myelopathy improvement drives patient outcomes after cervical deformity (CD) corrective surgery. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: CD correction involves radiographic malalignment correction and procedures to improve motor function and pain. It is unknown whether alignment or myelopathy improvement drives patient outcomes.
METHODS: Inclusion: Patients with CD with baseline/1-year radiographic and outcome scores. Cervical alignment improvement was defined by improvement in Ames CD modifiers. modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association (mJOA) improvement was defined as mild [15-17], moderate [12-14], severe [<12]. Patient groups included those who only improved in alignment, those who only improved in mJOA, those who improved in both, and those who did not improve. Changes in quality-of-life scores (neck disability index [NDI], EuroQuol-5 dimensions [EQ-5D], mJOA) were evaluated between groups.
RESULTS: A total of 70 patients (62 yr, 51% F) were included. Overall preoperative mJOA score was 13.04 ± 2.35. At baseline, 21 (30%) patients had mild myelopathy, 33 (47%) moderate, and 16 (23%) severe. Out of 70 patients 30 (44%) improved in mJOA and 13 (18.6%) met 1-year mJOA minimal clinically important difference. Distribution of improvement groups: 16/70 (23%) alignment-only improvement, 13 (19%) myelopathy-only improvement, 18 (26%) alignment and myelopathy improvement, and 23 (33%) no improvement. EQ-5D improved in 11 of 16 (69%) alignment-only patients, 11 of 18 (61%) myelopathy/alignment improvement, 13 of 13 (100%) myelopathy-only, and 10 of 23 (44%) no myelopathy/alignment improvement. There were no differences in decompression, baseline alignment, mJOA, EQ-5D, or NDI between groups. Patients who improved only in myelopathy showed significant differences in baseline-1Y EQ-5D (baseline: 0.74, 1 yr:0.83, P < 0.001). One-year C2-S1 sagittal vertical axis (SVA; mJOA r = -0.424, P = 0.002; EQ-5D r = -0.261, P = 0.050; NDI r = 0.321, P = 0.015) and C7-S1 SVA (mJOA r = -0.494, P < 0.001; EQ-5D r = -0.284, P = 0.031; NDI r = 0.334, P = 0.010) were correlated with improvement in health-related qualities of life.
CONCLUSION: After CD-corrective surgery, improvements in myelopathy symptoms and functional score were associated with superior 1-year patient-reported outcomes. Although there were no relationships between cervical-specific sagittal parameters and patient outcomes, global parameters of C2-S1 SVA and C7-S1 SVA showed significant correlations with overall 1-year mJOA, EQ-5D, and NDI. These results highlight myelopathy improvement as a key driver of patient-reported outcomes, and confirm the importance of sagittal alignment in patients with CD. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29462071     DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000002610

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)        ISSN: 0362-2436            Impact factor:   3.468


  9 in total

1.  Cost-utility of revisions for cervical deformity correction warrants minimization of reoperations.

Authors:  Samantha R Horn; Peter G Passias; Aaron Hockley; Renaud Lafage; Virginie Lafage; Hamid Hassanzadeh; Jason A Horowitz; Cole A Bortz; Frank A Segreto; Avery E Brown; Justin S Smith; Daniel M Sciubba; Gregory M Mundis; Michael P Kelley; Alan H Daniels; Douglas C Burton; Robert A Hart; Frank J Schwab; Shay Bess; Christopher I Shaffrey; Richard A Hostin; Christopher P Ames
Journal:  J Spine Surg       Date:  2018-12

2.  Predictive model for achieving good clinical and radiographic outcomes at one-year following surgical correction of adult cervical deformity.

Authors:  Peter Gust Passias; Samantha R Horn; Cheongeun Oh; Gregory W Poorman; Cole Bortz; Frank Segreto; Renaud Lafage; Bassel Diebo; Justin K Scheer; Justin S Smith; Christopher I Shaffrey; Robert Eastlack; Daniel M Sciubba; Themistocles Protopsaltis; Han Jo Kim; Robert A Hart; Virginie Lafage; Christopher P Ames
Journal:  J Craniovertebr Junction Spine       Date:  2021-09-08

3.  Do the newly proposed realignment targets bridge the gap between radiographic and clinical success in adult cervical deformity corrective surgery.

Authors:  Katherine E Pierce; Oscar Krol; Jordan Lebovic; Nicholas Kummer; Lara Passfall; Waleed Ahmad; Sara Naessig; Bassel Diebo; Peter Gust Passias
Journal:  J Craniovertebr Junction Spine       Date:  2022-03-09

4.  Neurological Complications and Recovery Rates of Patients With Adult Cervical Deformity Surgeries.

Authors:  Han Jo Kim; Yu-Cheng Yao; Christopher I Shaffrey; Justin S Smith; Michael P Kelly; Munish Gupta; Todd J Albert; Themistocles S Protopsaltis; Gregory M Mundis; Peter Passias; Eric Klineberg; Shay Bess; Virginie Lafage; Christopher P Ames
Journal:  Global Spine J       Date:  2020-11-23

Review 5.  Pathological Features and Surgical Strategies of Cervical Deformity.

Authors:  Xiangyao Sun; Siyuan Sun; Chao Kong; Wei Wang; Tongtong Zhang; Junzhe Ding; Xiangyu Li; Shibao Lu
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2020-05-12       Impact factor: 3.411

6.  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

7.  The impact of postoperative neurologic complications on recovery kinetics in cervical deformity surgery.

Authors:  Peter Gust Passias; Avery E Brown; Haddy Alas; Katherine E Pierce; Cole A Bortz; Bassel Diebo; Renaud Lafage; Virginie Lafage; Douglas C Burton; Robert Hart; Han Jo Kim; Shay Bess; Kevin Moattari; Rachel Joujon-Roche; Oscar Krol; Tyler Williamson; Peter Tretiakov; Bailey Imbo; Themistocles S Protopsaltis; Christopher Shaffrey; Frank Schwab; Robert Eastlack; Breton Line; Eric Klineberg; Justin Smith; Christopher Ames
Journal:  J Craniovertebr Junction Spine       Date:  2021-12-11

8.  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

9.  Two surgical strategies for treating multilevel cervical spondylotic myelopathy combined with kyphotic deformity.

Authors:  Kuang-Ting Yeh; Ing-Ho Chen; Ru-Ping Lee; Tzai-Chiu Yu; Cheng-Huan Peng; Kuan-Lin Liu; Jen-Hung Wang; Wen-Tien Wu
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2020-02       Impact factor: 1.817

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.