PURPOSE: This study aims to evaluate this new sequential correction technique for preventing postoperative coronal imbalance. METHODS: Adult Spinal deformity (ASD) patients were stratifies into two types: primary thoracolumbar/lumbar (TL/L) curve with compensatory lumbosacral (LS) curve (Type I) and primary LS curve with compensatory TL/L curve (Type II): for Type I patients: correction of major TL/L curve and one- or two-level segmental rod installed at the convexity of the TL/L curve, L4-S1 TLIF to correct fractional curve and a short rod installed on the contralateral side and installation of long rods; for Type II patients: horizontalize L4 and L5, short rod installation at the convexity of the LS curve, distraction of curve with regional rod and installation of long rods. ASD patients were enrolled with inclusion criteria: with pre-op TL/L Cobb angle more than 30°, with pelvic fixation and with UIV over T10. Radiographic parameters were analyzed. RESULTS: Twenty-one patients were recruited (14 patients Type I and 7 Type II patients). Both Cobb angle and coronal offset were significantly improved after surgery. In Type I patients, Cobb angle was improved from 50.48° to 26.91° and coronal offset from 2.94 to 0.95 cm; in Type II patients, Cobb angle was improved from 61.42° to 28.48° and coronal offset from 2.82 to 1.38 cm. In the 10 patients with baseline coronal imbalance, 9 were corrected to coronal balance after surgery. CONCLUSION: The sequential correction technique allows decomposing the complex correction surgery into several steps, and each step focuses only on one task. It can also reduce the difficulty of rod installation due to the separated maneuvers and multi-rod system. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material.
PURPOSE: This study aims to evaluate this new sequential correction technique for preventing postoperative coronal imbalance. METHODS: Adult Spinal deformity (ASD) patients were stratifies into two types: primary thoracolumbar/lumbar (TL/L) curve with compensatory lumbosacral (LS) curve (Type I) and primary LS curve with compensatory TL/L curve (Type II): for Type I patients: correction of major TL/L curve and one- or two-level segmental rod installed at the convexity of the TL/L curve, L4-S1 TLIF to correct fractional curve and a short rod installed on the contralateral side and installation of long rods; for Type IIpatients: horizontalize L4 and L5, short rod installation at the convexity of the LS curve, distraction of curve with regional rod and installation of long rods. ASDpatients were enrolled with inclusion criteria: with pre-op TL/L Cobb angle more than 30°, with pelvic fixation and with UIV over T10. Radiographic parameters were analyzed. RESULTS: Twenty-one patients were recruited (14 patients Type I and 7 Type IIpatients). Both Cobb angle and coronal offset were significantly improved after surgery. In Type I patients, Cobb angle was improved from 50.48° to 26.91° and coronal offset from 2.94 to 0.95 cm; in Type IIpatients, Cobb angle was improved from 61.42° to 28.48° and coronal offset from 2.82 to 1.38 cm. In the 10 patients with baseline coronal imbalance, 9 were corrected to coronal balance after surgery. CONCLUSION: The sequential correction technique allows decomposing the complex correction surgery into several steps, and each step focuses only on one task. It can also reduce the difficulty of rod installation due to the separated maneuvers and multi-rod system. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material.
Authors: Frank Schwab; Benjamin Ungar; Benjamin Blondel; Jacob Buchowski; Jeffrey Coe; Donald Deinlein; Christopher DeWald; Hossein Mehdian; Christopher Shaffrey; Clifford Tribus; Virginie Lafage Journal: Spine (Phila Pa 1976) Date: 2012-05-20 Impact factor: 3.468
Authors: Steven D Glassman; Sigurd Berven; Keith Bridwell; William Horton; John R Dimar Journal: Spine (Phila Pa 1976) Date: 2005-03-15 Impact factor: 3.468
Authors: Woojin Cho; Jonathan R Mason; Justin S Smith; Adam L Shimer; Adam S Wilson; Christopher I Shaffrey; Francis H Shen; Wendy M Novicoff; Kai-Ming G Fu; Joshua E Heller; Vincent Arlet Journal: J Neurosurg Spine Date: 2013-08-02
Authors: Wataru Ishida; Benjamin D Elder; Christina Holmes; C Rory Goodwin; Sheng-Fu L Lo; Thomas A Kosztowski; Ali Bydon; Ziya L Gokaslan; Jean-Paul Wolinsky; Daniel M Sciubba; Timothy F Witham Journal: World Neurosurg Date: 2016-06-16 Impact factor: 2.104
Authors: Gregory M Mundis; Corey T Walker; Justin S Smith; Thomas J Buell; Renaud Lafage; Christopher I Shaffrey; Robert K Eastlack; David O Okonkwo; Shay Bess; Virginie Lafage; Juan S Uribe; Lawrence G Lenke; Christopher P Ames Journal: Eur Spine J Date: 2022-03-15 Impact factor: 2.721
Authors: Andrea Redaelli; Francesco Langella; Michal Dziubak; Riccardo Cecchinato; Marco Damilano; Giuseppe Peretti; Pedro Berjano; Claudio Lamartina Journal: Eur Spine J Date: 2020-01-06 Impact factor: 3.134
Authors: Scott L Zuckerman; Zeeshan M Sardar; Christopher S Lai; Gerard F Marciano; Mena G Kerolus; Ian A Buchanan; Alex S Ha; Meghan Cerpa; Michael P Kelly; Stéphane Bourret; Kazuhiro Hasegawa; Hee-Kit Wong; Gabriel Liu; Hwee Weng Dennis Hey; Hend Riahi; Jean-Charles Le Huec; Lawrence G Lenke Journal: Eur Spine J Date: 2021-05-19 Impact factor: 3.134