Ziyu Zhou1, Caiyun Hou2, Dongdong Li3, Jianwei Si4. 1. Department of Spine Surgery, Yulin City First Hospital Yulin Branch, No. 93, Yuxi Road, Yulin 719000, China. 2. Medical College of Yan'an University, No. 580, Shengdi Road, Yan'an 716000, China. 3. Medical College of Ningxia University, No. 692, Shengli Road, Yinchuan 750004, China. 4. Department of Spine Surgery, The General Hospital of Ningxia Medical University, No. 804, Shengli Road, Yinchuan 750004, China. Electronic address: zzysjwesj@163.com.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Degenerative spondylolisthesis (DS) and lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) are the most common degenerative spinal diseases. The evaluating of spinopelvic sagittal alignment of the two diseases using pelvic radius (PR) technique have not been reported. The purpose of this study was to use PR measurement technique to compare the differences in spinopelvic sagittal alignment between DS and LSS. METHODS: A total of 145 patients with DS or LSS were retrospectively reviewed. Seventy patients with DS (DS group) and 75 age-matched patients with LSS (LSS group) were enrolled. Spinopelvic parameters including pelvic angle (PA), regional lumbopelvic lordosis (PR-L1, PR-L2, PR-L3, PR-L4 and PR-L5), total lumbopelvic lordosis (PR-T12), pelvic morphology (PR-S1), sagittal vertical axis from the C7 plumb line (SVA), lumbar lordosis (LL), thoracic kyphosis (TK), L4 slope and L5 slope were assessed in the two groups. Several parameters of DS and LSS group were compared with the normal population (NP). RESULTS: The PR-L4, PR-L5 and PR-S1 in the DS group were significantly smaller than those in the LSS group. There was no difference in PR-T12 between the DS group and NP (p > 0.05), while PR-T12 of the LSS group were significantly lower (p < 0.01). Degree of correlations among spinopelvic parameters differed between the two groups. PR-T12 of the DS group was more strongly correlated with PA (r = -0.829, p < 0.001) than with LL (r = 0.664, p < 0.001), TK (r = 0.582, p < 0.001). PR-T12 of the LSS group was more strongly correlated with LL (r = 0.854, p < 0.001), TK (r = 0.616, p < 0.001) than with PA (r = -0.582, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: PR-L4 and PR-L5 may be the predisposing factors for DS development. Spinopelvic morphology differed in patients with DS and LSS compared to NP. The compensatory mechanisms to maintain spinopelvic sagittal alignment in DS and LSS patients may be different.
BACKGROUND: Degenerative spondylolisthesis (DS) and lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) are the most common degenerative spinal diseases. The evaluating of spinopelvic sagittal alignment of the two diseases using pelvic radius (PR) technique have not been reported. The purpose of this study was to use PR measurement technique to compare the differences in spinopelvic sagittal alignment between DS and LSS. METHODS: A total of 145 patients with DS or LSS were retrospectively reviewed. Seventy patients with DS (DS group) and 75 age-matched patients with LSS (LSS group) were enrolled. Spinopelvic parameters including pelvic angle (PA), regional lumbopelvic lordosis (PR-L1, PR-L2, PR-L3, PR-L4 and PR-L5), total lumbopelvic lordosis (PR-T12), pelvic morphology (PR-S1), sagittal vertical axis from the C7 plumb line (SVA), lumbar lordosis (LL), thoracic kyphosis (TK), L4 slope and L5 slope were assessed in the two groups. Several parameters of DS and LSS group were compared with the normal population (NP). RESULTS: The PR-L4, PR-L5 and PR-S1 in the DS group were significantly smaller than those in the LSS group. There was no difference in PR-T12 between the DS group and NP (p > 0.05), while PR-T12 of the LSS group were significantly lower (p < 0.01). Degree of correlations among spinopelvic parameters differed between the two groups. PR-T12 of the DS group was more strongly correlated with PA (r = -0.829, p < 0.001) than with LL (r = 0.664, p < 0.001), TK (r = 0.582, p < 0.001). PR-T12 of the LSS group was more strongly correlated with LL (r = 0.854, p < 0.001), TK (r = 0.616, p < 0.001) than with PA (r = -0.582, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: PR-L4 and PR-L5 may be the predisposing factors for DS development. Spinopelvic morphology differed in patients with DS and LSS compared to NP. The compensatory mechanisms to maintain spinopelvic sagittal alignment in DS and LSSpatients may be different.