| Literature DB >> 31097011 |
Yao Wang1, Chao Xue1, Kai Song1, Tianhao Wang1, Wenhao Hu1, Fanqi Hu1, Yongyu Hao1, Zhifa Zhang1, Chunguo Wang1, Xiaoxi Yang2, Tianqi Fan2, Guoquan Zheng1, Zheng Wang1, Yan Wang1, Xuesong Zhang3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Pedicle subtraction osteotomy (PSO) and vertebral column decancellation (VCD) are frequently used methods for correction of thoracolumbar kyphosis resulting from ankylosing spondylitis (AS). However, there are limited reports performed to evaluate the difference of loss of correction and the effectiveness of PSO and VCD techniques in patients with thoracolumbar kyphosis secondary to AS.Entities:
Keywords: Ankylosing spondylitis; Complications; Correction loss; Pedicle subtraction osteotomy; Thoracolumbar kyphosis; Vertebral column decancellation
Mesh:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31097011 PMCID: PMC6521496 DOI: 10.1186/s13018-019-1170-5
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Orthop Surg Res ISSN: 1749-799X Impact factor: 2.359
Patients’ demographic data (mean ± SD, range)
| Parameters | PSO group ( | VCD group ( |
|---|---|---|
| Age (years) | 38.5 ± 11.5 (22–63) | 38.1 ± 9.0 (21–54) |
| Gender | 23 males, 2 females | 34 males, 2 females |
| Follow-up (months) | 30.2 ± 4.7 (24–38) | 28.8 ± 3.7 (24–39) |
Fig. 1Spine osteotomy techniques. a Pedicle subtraction osteotomy. b “Y”-shaped vertebral column decancellation.
Fig. 2A 37-year-old male patient with thoracolumbar kyphosis secondary to ankylosing spondylitis. a Preoperative standing lateral radiograph. b Immediately after surgery with pedicle subtraction osteotomy (PSO) technique. c Lateral radiograph taken 26 months after surgery. AIL angle of instrumented levels, DIDW the sum of distal non-fused intervertebral disc wedging, GK global kyphosis, KPNS kyphotic angle of proximal non-fused segment involved in the global kyphosis, LL lumbar lordosis, OA osteotomized vertebra angle, PJA proximal junctional angle, SVA sagittal vertical axis, HP hilus pulmonis, CG the center of gravity
Fig. 3A 38-year-old male patient with thoracolumbar kyphosis secondary to ankylosing spondylitis. a Preoperative standing lateral radiograph. b Immediately after surgery with vertebral column decancellation (VCD) technique. c Lateral radiograph taken 32 months after surgery. AIL angle of instrumented levels, DIDW the sum of distal non-fused intervertebral disc wedging, GK global kyphosis, KPNS kyphotic angle of proximal non-fused segment involved in the global kyphosis, LL lumbar lordosis, OA osteotomized vertebra angle, PJA proximal junctional angle, SVA sagittal vertical axis, HP hilus pulmonis, CG the center of gravity
Complications in two groups
| Complications | PSO group ( | VCD group ( |
|---|---|---|
| Dural tears | 2 (8%) | 3 (8.3%) |
| Transient lower extremity weakness | 1 (4%) | 1 (2.8%) |
| Abdominal tensive lesions | 2 (8%) | 5 (13.9%) |
| Ileus | 0 | 0 |
| Mild sagittal translation | 3 (12%) | 4 (11.1%) |
| PJK | 1 (4%) | 1 (2.8%) |
| Fixation failure | 0 | 0 |
| Main vascular injury | 0 | 0 |
Radiographic assessment of preoperative, postoperative and the final follow-up data
| Parameters | Group | Preoperative | Postoperative |
| Final follow-up |
| Correction | Loss of correction |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| GK (°) | PSO | 62.26 ± 14.80* | 24.61 ± 12.99a |
| 26.92 ± 16.00b |
| 37.65 ± 9.16* | 2.31 ± 6.23 |
| VCD | 76.43 ± 17.45* | 27.31 ± 14.01a |
| 29.60 ± 14.64b |
| 49.13 ± 9.87* | 2.29 ± 4.02 | |
| LL (°) | PSO | -1.48 ± 8.32 | -35.18 ± 25.84*a |
| -34.47 ± 24.69* |
| 33.69 ± 24.08* | - |
| VCD | 1.15 ± 8.74 | -43.78 ± 13.62*a |
| -43.74 ± 13.36* |
| 44.93 ± 11.73* | - | |
| SVA (mm) | PSO | 170.94 ± 36.98 | 58.37 ± 25.77a |
| 62.42 ± 25.72 |
| 112.57 ± 29.36 | - |
| VCD | 173.54 ± 55.30 | 62.71 ± 48.15a |
| 64.44 ± 49.39 |
| 110.83 ± 35.68 | – | |
| OA (°) | PSO | – | 33.84 ± 5.23* | – | 33.70 ± 5.51* |
| – | – |
| VCD | – | 44.10 ± 8.14* | – | 43.95 ± 7.97* |
| – | – | |
| KPNS (°) | PSO | – | 30.58 ± 11.62 | – | 34.49 ± 12.06b |
| – | – |
| VCD | – | 32.19 ± 11.98 | – | 35.60 ± 13.49b |
| – | – | |
| DIDW (°) | PSO | – | -6.45 ± 4.75 | – | -6.32 ± 4.95 |
| – | – |
| VCD | – | -8.26 ± 4.22 | – | -7.98 ± 3.67 |
| – | – | |
| AIL (°) | PSO | – | 19.76 ± 14.47 | – | 19.56 ± 13.85 |
| – | – |
| VCD | – | 13.11 ± 8.42 | – | 13.42 ± 7.81 |
| – | – | |
| PJA (°) | PSO | – | 11.88 ± 5.51 | – | 14.24 ± 6.86b |
| – | – |
| VCD | – | 14.03 ± 6.96 | – | 16.33 ± 7.27b |
| – | – |
AIL angle of instrumented levels, DIDW the sum of distal non-fused intervertebral disc wedging, GK global kyphosis, KPNS kyphotic angle of proximal non-fused segment involved in the global kyphosis, LL lumbar lordosis, OA osteotomized vertebra angle, PJA proximal junctional angle, PSO pedicle subtraction osteotomy, SVA sagittal vertical axis, VCD vertebral column decancellation
*Significant difference between 2 groups: p < 0.05
aSignificant difference between preoperative and postoperative values: p < 0.05
bSignificant difference between postoperative and final follow-up values: p < 0.05
Fig. 4Illustration of the differences of PSO and VCD technique. By shortening the same height of posterior vertebral column (H), the VCD osteotomy may achieve larger correction (β) comparing with PSO technique (α). To obtain a same corrective angle (α), the shortening of posterior vertebral column in VCD osteotomy (h) is much smaller than that in PSO technique (H)