| Literature DB >> 34478128 |
Hao-Hua Wu1, Dean Chou2, Kevork Hindoyan3, Jeremy Guinn2, Joshua Rivera2, Pingguo Duan2, Minghao Wang2, Zhuo Xi2, Bo Li2, Andrew Lee3, Shane Burch3, Praveen Mummaneni2, Sigurd Berven3.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Although matching lumbar lordosis (LL) with pelvic incidence (PI) is an important surgical goal for adult spinal deformity (ASD), there is concern that overcorrection may lead to proximal junctional kyphosis (PJK). We introduce the upper instrumented vertebra-femoral angle (UIVFA) as a measure of appropriate postoperative position in the setting of lower thoracic to pelvis surgical correction for patients with sagittal imbalance. We hypothesize that a more posterior UIV position in relation to the center of the femoral head is associated with an increased risk of PJK given compensatory hyperkyphosis above the UIV.Entities:
Keywords: Adult spinal deformity; Proximal junctional kyphosis; Surgical complication
Mesh:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34478128 PMCID: PMC8837553 DOI: 10.1007/s43390-021-00408-1
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Spine Deform ISSN: 2212-134X
Fig. 1The upper instrumented vertebra–femoral angle (UIVPA) is represented by “a” as the angle subtended by a line from the UIV centroid to the femoral head center to a vertical reference line
Demographics and preoperative radiographic measurements of patients with and without PJK
| PJK ( | No PJK ( | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Age | 64.6 ± 7.1 | 61.6 ± 12.4 | 0.16 |
| Female (%) | 37 (72%) | 44 (65%) | 0.36 |
| Preop SS | 30.6 ± 9.8 | 31.1 ± 12.9 | 0.83 |
| Preop PT | 28.8 ± 8.2 | 25.7 ± 10.3 | 0.08 |
| Preop PI | 59.5 ± 11.4 | 56.4 ± 13.6 | 0.19 |
| Preop LL | 29.0 ± 17.8 | 32.8 ± 19.3 | 0.28 |
| Preop PI–LL | 30.0 ± 17.7 | 24.6 ± 19.3 | 0.11 |
| Preop T1PA | 30.8 ± 11.9 | 25.3 ± 9.7 | |
| Preop TK (T5–T12) | 24.6 ± 15.0 | 25.1 ± 21.4 | 0.89 |
| Preop SVA (mm) | 103.1 ± 67 | 79.2 ± 54 | |
| Preop CSVL (mm) | 21.1 ± 27 | 27.0 ± 42 | 0.42 |
| Preop UIVFA | 6.5 ± 8.8 | 7.3 ± 7.2 | 0.58 |
Bolded text means a significant p-value (e.g. p < 0.05)
Postoperative radiographic measurements of patients with and without PJK
| PJK ( | No PJK ( | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Postop SS | 32.7 ± 9.5 | 32.5 ± 10.3 | 0.90 |
| Postop PT | 27.3 ± 9.2 | 23.3 ± 11.0 | |
| Postop LL | 47.7 ± 13.9 | 42.4 ± 13.1 | |
| Postop PI–LL | 10.1 ± 11.7 | 11.7 ± 16.3 | 0.59 |
| Postop T1PA | 24.6 ± 8.9 | 23.6 ± 12.0 | 0.62 |
| Postop TK (T5–T12) | 44.9 ± 13.2 | 31.6 ± 18.8 | |
| Postop SVA (mm) | 57.3 ± 39.3 | 56.4 ± 48.9 | 0.92 |
| Postop CSVL (mm) | 17.2 ± 14.1 | 19.1 ± 24.5 | 0.63 |
| Postop UIVFA | 12.6 ± 4.8 | 9.4 ± 6.6 | |
| DeltaUIVFA | 6.1 ± 7.6 | 2.1 ± 5.6 |
Bolded text means a significant p-value (e.g. p < 0.05)
Fig. 2Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve for UIVFA as a predictor for PJK
Fig. 3Comparison of UIVFA between patient with and without PJK at 2-year follow-up. a UIVFA of PJK patient at preop, immediate postop and 6-month postop. At immediate postop, patient’s UIVFA is 17° which is greater than the optimal 11.5° cut-off. b UIVFA of patient without PJK at preop, immediate postop and 2-year postop. At immediate postop, patient’s UIVFA is 10° which meets the optimal 11.5° cut-off