Literature DB >> 33925824

Optimized Surgical Strategy for Adult Spinal Deformity: Quantitative Lordosis Correction versus Lordosis Morphology.

Sang-Kyu Im1, Ki Young Lee1, Hae Seong Lim1, Dong Uk Suh1, Jung-Hee Lee1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: In surgical correction of adult spinal deformity (ASD), pelvic incidence (PI)-lumbar lordosis (LL) plays a key role to restore normal sagittal alignment. Recently, it has been found that postoperative lordosis morphology act as an important factor in preventing mechanical complications. However, there have been no studies on the effect of postoperative lordosis morphology on the restoration of sagittal alignment. The primary objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of postoperative lordosis morphology on achievement of optimal sagittal alignment. The secondary objective was to find out which radiographic or morphologic parameter affects sagittal alignment in surgical correction of ASD.
METHODS: 228 consecutive patients with lumbar degenerative kyphosis who underwent deformity correction and long-segment fixation from T10 to S1 with sacropelvic fixation and follow-up over 2 years were enrolled. Patients were divided according to whether optimal alignment was achieved (balanced group) or not (non-balanced group) at last follow-up. We analyzed the differences of postoperative radiographic parameters and morphologic parameters between two groups. Correlation analysis and stepwise multiple linear regression analysis was performed to predict the effect of PI-LL and morphologic parameters on the sagittal vertical axis (SVA).
RESULTS: Of 228 patients, 195 (85.5%) achieved optimal alignment at last follow-up. Two groups significantly differed in postoperative and last follow-up LL (p < 0.001 and p = 0.028, respectively) and postoperative and last follow-up PI-LL (p < 0.001 and p = 0.001, respectively). Morphologic parameters did not significantly differ between the two groups except lower lordosis arc angle (=postoperative sacral slope). In correlation analysis and stepwise multiple linear regression analysis, postoperative PI-LL was the only parameter which had significant association with last follow-up SVA (R2 = 0.134, p < 0.001). Morphologic parameters did not have any association with last follow-up SVA.
CONCLUSIONS: When planning spine reconstruction surgery, although considering postoperative lordosis morphology is necessary, it is still very important considering proportional lordosis correction based on individual spinopelvic alignment (PI-LL) to achieve optimal sagittal alignment.

Entities:  

Keywords:  lordosis correction; lordosis distribution; lordosis morphology; lumbar degenerative kyphosis; optimal sagittal alignment

Year:  2021        PMID: 33925824     DOI: 10.3390/jcm10091867

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Med        ISSN: 2077-0383            Impact factor:   4.241


  33 in total

1.  Does vertebral level of pedicle subtraction osteotomy correlate with degree of spinopelvic parameter correction?

Authors:  Virginie Lafage; Frank Schwab; Shaleen Vira; Robert Hart; Douglas Burton; Justin S Smith; Oheneba Boachie-Adjei; Alexis Shelokov; Richard Hostin; Christopher I Shaffrey; Munish Gupta; Behrooz A Akbarnia; Shay Bess; Jean-Pierre Farcy
Journal:  J Neurosurg Spine       Date:  2010-12-24

2.  A variability study of computerized sagittal spinopelvic radiologic measurements of trunk balance.

Authors:  E Berthonnaud; H Labelle; P Roussouly; G Grimard; G Vaz; J Dimnet
Journal:  J Spinal Disord Tech       Date:  2005-02

Review 3.  Sagittal plane considerations and the pelvis in the adult patient.

Authors:  Frank Schwab; Virginie Lafage; Ashish Patel; Jean-Pierre Farcy
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2009-08-01       Impact factor: 3.468

4.  Predictive Accuracy of Surgimap Surgical Planning for Sagittal Imbalance: A Cohort Study.

Authors:  Francesco Langella; Jorge H Villafañe; Marco Damilano; Riccardo Cecchinato; Matteo Pejrona; Maryem Ismael; Pedro Berjano
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2017-11-15       Impact factor: 3.468

Review 5.  Sagittal plane deformity: an overview of interpretation and management.

Authors:  Pierre Roussouly; Colin Nnadi
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2010-06-22       Impact factor: 3.134

6.  Classification of the normal variation in the sagittal alignment of the human lumbar spine and pelvis in the standing position.

Authors:  Pierre Roussouly; Sohrab Gollogly; Eric Berthonnaud; Johanes Dimnet
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2005-02-01       Impact factor: 3.468

7.  Dynamic sagittal imbalance of the spine in degenerative flat back: significance of pelvic tilt in surgical treatment.

Authors:  C S Lee; C K Lee; Y T Kim; Y M Hong; J H Yoo
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2001-09-15       Impact factor: 3.468

8.  Complications and predictive factors for the successful treatment of flatback deformity (fixed sagittal imbalance).

Authors:  K C Booth; K H Bridwell; L G Lenke; C R Baldus; K M Blanke
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1999-08-15       Impact factor: 3.468

9.  Computerized preoperative planning for correction of sagittal deformity of the spine.

Authors:  Nicolas Aurouer; Ibrahim Obeid; Olivier Gille; Vincent Pointillart; Jean-Marc Vital
Journal:  Surg Radiol Anat       Date:  2009-07-14       Impact factor: 1.246

10.  Pedicle subtraction osteotomies (PSO) in the lumbar spine for sagittal deformities.

Authors:  Pedro Berjano; Max Aebi
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2014-12-09       Impact factor: 3.134

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.