The clinical impact of global coronal malalignment is underestimated in adult patients with thoracolumbar scoliosis

Practical Methods of Assessing Coronal Alignment and Outcomes in Adult Spinal Deformity Surgery: A Comparative Analysis

STUDY DESIGN

Asymptomatic cohort: prospective, cross-sectional, multicenter. Symptomatic: retrospective, multisurgeon, single-center.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the association between cranial coronal alignment and adult spinal deformity (ASD) surgical risk and outcomes.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

ASD leads to decreased quality of life. Studies have shown that coronal malignment (CM) is associated with worse surgical outcomes.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 468 adult participants were prospectively enrolled in the asymptomatic cohort. Totally, 172 symptomatic ASD patients with 2-year follow-ups were retrospectively enrolled in the symptomatic cohort. Three cranial plumb line parameters: the positions of the plumb lines from the midpoint between the medial orbital rims (ORB-L5), the odontoid (OD-L5), and the C7 centroid (C7-L5) relative to the L5 pedicle, were measured. Each subject had plumb line medial (M), touching (T), or lateral (L) to either pedicle. The association between each group of patients and radiographic parameters, intraoperative variables, patient-reported outcomes, and clinical outcomes were analyzed.

RESULTS

In the asymptomatic cohort, OD-L5 was medial to or touching the L5 pedicle in 98.3% of volunteers. In the symptomatic patients, preoperative OD-L5-L exhibited higher mean age (56.2±14.0), odontoid-coronal vertical axis (OD-CVA) (5.5±3.3 cm), Oswestry disability index (ODI) score (40.6±18.4), pelvic fixation rate (56/62, 90.3%), OR time (528.4±144.6 min), median estimated blood loss (1300 ml), and durotomy rate (24/62, 38.7%). A similar pattern of higher CVA, preoperative ODI, intraoperative pelvic fixation rate, OR time, estimated blood loss, and durotomy rate was observed in ORB-L5-L and C7-L5-L patients. Final follow-up postoperative OD-L5-L was associated with higher rates of proximal junctional kyphosis (13.0%) and pseudarthrosis (17.4%).

CONCLUSION

Preoperative OD-L5, ORB-L5, and C7-L5 lateral to pedicles were associated with worse preoperative ODI and higher intraoperative complexity. Postoperative OD-L5-L was associated with higher rates of proximal junctional kyphosis and pseudarthrosis. Postoperative CM, approximated by the cranial plumb line lateral to the L5 pedicles, was associated with sagittal plane complications.

Anterior lumbar interbody fusion versus transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for correction of lumbosacral fractional curves in adult (thoraco)lumbar scoliosis: A systematic review

Background

Anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) or transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) may be used to correct the lumbosacral fractional curve (LsFC) in de novo adult (thoraco) lumbar scoliosis. Yet, the relative benefits of ALIF and TLIF for LsFC correction remain largely undetermined.

Purpose

To compare the currently available data comparing radiographic correction of the LsFC provided by ALIF and TLIF of LsFC in adult (thoraco)lumbar scoliosis.

Methods

A systematic review was performed on original articles discussing fractional curve correction of lumbosacral spinal deformity (using search criteria: "lumbar" and "fractional curve"). Articles which discussed TLIF or ALIF for LsFC correction were presented and radiographic results for TLIF and ALIF were compared.

Results

Thirty-one articles were returned in the original search criteria, with 7 articles included in the systematic review criteria. All 7 articles presented radiographic results using TLIF for LsFC correction. Three of these articles also discussed results for patients whose LsFC were treated with ALIFs; 2 articles directly compared TLIF and ALIF for LsFC correction. Level III and level IV evidence indicated ALIF as advantageous for reducing the coronal Cobb angle of the LsFC. There were mixed results on relative efficacy of ALIF and TLIF in the LsFC for restoration of adequate global coronal alignment.

Conclusions

Limited level III and IV evidence suggests ALIF as advantageous for reducing the coronal Cobb angle of the LsFC in de novo adult (thoraco) lumbar scoliosis. Relative efficacy of ALIF and TLIF in the LsFC for restoration of global coronal alignment may be dictated by several factors, including directionality and magnitude of preoperative coronal deformity. Given the limited and low-quality evidence, additional research is warranted to determine the ideal interbody support strategies to address the LsFC in adult (thoraco) lumbar scoliosis.

How coronal malalignment affects the surgical outcome in corrective spine surgery for adult symptomatic lumbar deformity

PURPOSE

The importance of coronal alignment is unclear, while the importance of sagittal alignment in the treatment of adult patients with spinal deformities is well described. This study sought to elucidate the impact of global coronal malalignment (GCMA) in surgically treated adult symptomatic lumbar deformity (ASLD) patients.

METHODS

A multicentre retrospective analysis of a prospective ASD database. GCMA was defined as GCA (C7PL-CSVL) ≥ 3 cm. GCMA is categorized based on the Obeid-Coronal Malalignment Classification (O-CM). Demographic, surgical, radiographic, HRQOL, and complication data were analysed. The risk for postoperative GCMA was analysed by univariate and multivariate analyses.

RESULTS

Of 230 surgically treated ASLD patients, 96 patients showed GCMA preoperatively and baseline GCA was correlated with the baseline SRS-22 pain domain score (r = - 30). Postoperatively, 62 patients (27%, O-CM type 1: 41[18%], type 2: 21[9%]) developed GCMA. The multivariate risk analysis indicated dementia (OR 20.1[1.2-304.4]), diabetes (OR 5.9[1.3-27.3]), and baseline O-CM type 2 (OR 2.1[1.3-3.4]) as independent risk factors for postoperative GCMA. The 2-year SRS-22 score was not different between the 2 groups, while 4 GCMA patients required revision surgery within 1 year after surgery due to coronal decompensation (GCMA+ vs. GCMA- function: 3.6 ± 0.6 vs. 3.7 ± 0.7, pain: 3.7 ± 0.8 vs. 3.8 ± 0.8, self-image: 3.6 ± 0.8 vs. 3.6 ± 0.8, mental health: 3.7 ± 0.8 vs. 3.8 ± 0.9, satisfaction: 3.9 ± 0.9 vs. 3.9 ± 0.8, total: 3.7 ± 0.7 vs. 3.7 ± 0.7). Additionally, the comparisons of 2-yr SRS-22 between GCMA ± showed no difference in any UIV and LIV level or O-CM type.

CONCLUSIONS

In ASLD patients with corrective spine surgery, GCMA at 2 years did not affect HRQOL or major complications at any spinal fusion extent or O-CM type of malalignment, whereas GCA correlated with pain intensity before surgery. These findings may warrant further study of the impact of GCMA on HRQOL in the surgical treatment of ASLD patients.

Fixed coronal malalignment (CM) in the lumbar spine independently impacts disability in adult spinal deformity (ASD) patients when considering the obeid-CM (O-CM) classification

BACKGROUND

Postoperative flatback has been described in detail for sagittal plane considerations over the past 2 decades, and its correlations with disability are now accepted. Fixed Coronal Malalignment (CM) has been less described, and some authors report no significant association with the clinical outcome. The O-CM classification analyses CM and incorporates specific modifiers for each curve type.

PURPOSE

This study evaluates the O-CM classification modifiers according to age, sagittal alignment, and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). Our hypothesis is that fixed CM correlates with PROMs independently from sagittal alignment and age.

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective analysis of a large adult spinal deformity (ASD) database prospectively collected.

PATIENT SAMPLE

We included 747 patients from the database with long lumbar fusion (more than 3 levels), with at least two years of follow-up. Three categories of patients met the inclusion criteria (prior surgery at baseline and no revision surgery afterward, prior surgery at baseline and revision afterward, no prior surgery at baseline but fusion>3 levels and 2 years follow-up).

OUTCOME MEASURES

All patients completed the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Short Form 36 (SF36), and Scoliosis Research Society 22 scores.

METHODS

The patients were classified according to the six modifiers of the O-CM classification. Central Sacral Vertical Line (CSVL) above 2, 3, and 4 cm's impact on PROMs was analyzed. Multivariate analysis was performed on the relationship between PROMS and age, global tilt (GT), and CM modifiers.

RESULTS

After multivariate analysis using age and GT as confounding factors, we found that CM independently affects PROMs starting at 2 cm offset. Disability increases linearly with CSVL. Patients classified with 2B modifiers have the worst SRS-22 total score, social life, and self-image.

CONCLUSION

In a fused spine, CM independently affects disability in ASD patients. Disability increases linearly with CSVL. Despite previous reports that failed to find correlations of CM with PROMs, our study showed that fixed postoperative CM, according to O-CM classification, correlates independently from sagittal malalignment with worse PROMs.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III.

Lumbar Pedicle Subtraction Osteotomy (PSO): A Novel Surgical Technique for Correction of Sagittal and Coronal Imbalance Using Laterally Based Satellite Rods

STUDY DESIGN

Operative video and supplemental manuscript.

OBJECTIVE

To present a novel step-by-step approach to performing a lumbar pedicle subtraction osteotomy (PSO) using laterally based satellite rods.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Multi-rod constructs have demonstrated paramount for decreasing rates of pseudarthrosis after PSOs. Multi-rods constructs can be achieved using either "satellite" rods (rods not connected to the primary rods) and/or "accessory rods" (rods connected to the primary rods).

METHODS

A step-by-step approach to performing a lumbar PSO using a laterally based satellite rod configuration is provided through a case example and surgical technique video.

RESULTS

Lateral satellite rods can be particularly useful from a surgical perspective, as they provide temporary stabilization while the PSO is being performed, facilitate closure of the osteotomy site (symmetric and/or asymmetric), and serve as the final fixation rods across the PSO without needing to be exchanged.

CONCLUSIONS

Use of laterally based satellite rods is a useful technique for lumbar PSOs, as they provide temporary stabilization while the PSO is being performed, facilitate closure of the osteotomy site, and serve as the final fixation rods across the PSO without needing to be exchanged.

The Lumbosacral Fractional Curve vs Maximum Coronal Cobb Angle in Adult Spinal Deformity Patients with Coronal Malalignment: Which Matters More?

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVES

In patients undergoing adult spinal deformity (ASD) surgery we sought to: 1) report preoperative and postoperative lumbosacral fractional (LSF) curve and maximum coronal Cobb angles and 2) determine their impact on radiographic, clinical, and patient-reported outcomes (PROs).

METHODS

A single-institution cohort study was undertaken. The LSF curve was the cobb angle between the sacrum and most tilted lower lumbar vertebra. Coronal/sagittal vertical axis (CVA/SVA) were collected. Patients were compared between 4 groups: 1) Neutral Alignment (NA); 2) coronal malalignment only (CM); 3) Sagittal malalignment only (SM); and 4) Combined-Coronal-Sagittal-Malalignment (CCSM). Outcomes including postoperative CM, postoperative coronal vertical axis, complications, readmissions, reoperation, and PROs.

RESULTS

A total of 243 patients underwent ASD surgery with mean total instrumented levels of 13.5. Mean LSF curve was 12.1±9.9°(0.2-62.3) and mean max Cobb angle was 43.0±26.5° (0.0-134.3). The largest mean LSF curves were seen in patients with CM (14.6°) and CCSM (13.1°) compared to NA (12.1°) and SM (9.5°) (p=0.100). A higher LSF curve was seen in patients with fusion to the sacrum and instrumentation to the pelvis (p=0.009), and a higher LSF curve was associated with more TLIFs (p=0.031). Postoperatively, more TLIFs were associated with greater amount of LSF curve correction (p<0.001). Comparing the LSF and the max Cob angle among Qiu types, the highest mean max Cobb angle was in Qiu Type B patients (p=0.025), whereas the highest mean LSF curve was in Qiu Type C patients (p=0.037). Moreover, 82.7% of patients had a LSF curve opposite the max Cobb angle. The LSF curve was larger than the max Cobb angle in 22/243 (9.1%) patients, and most of these 22 patients were Qiu Type A (59.1%). Regarding correction, the max Cobb angle achieved more correction than the LSF curve, judged by the percent improved from preop (54.5% Cobb vs. 46.5% LSF, p=0.025) in patients with max cobb>20° and LSF curve >5°. The LSF curve underwent greater correction in Qiu Type C patients (9.2°) compared to Type A (5.7°) and Type B (5.1°) (p=0.023); however, the max Cobb angle was similarly corrected among Qiu Types: Type A 21.8°, Type B 24.6°, and Type C 25.4° (p=0.602). Minimal differences were seen comparing the preop/postop/change in LSF curve and max Cobb angle regarding postop CM, postop CVA, complications, readmissions, reoperation, and PROs.

CONCLUSIONS

The LSF curve was highest in patients with CM, CCSM, and Qiu Type C curves. Most patients had a LSF curve opposite the max Cobb angle. The max Cobb angle was more often corrected than the LSF curve. The LSF curve underwent greater correction among Qiu Type C patients, whereas the max Cobb angle was similarly corrected among all Qiu Types. No clear trend was seen regarding postoperative complications and PROs between the LSF curve and max Cobb angle.

Postoperative Radiological Improvement after Staged Surgery Using Lateral Lumbar Interbody Fusion for Preoperative Coronal Malalignment in Patients with Adult Spinal Deformity

This retrospective observational study evaluated improvement in coronal malalignment (CM) after anteroposterior staged surgery using lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) in patients with coronal lumbar curve adult spinal deformity (ASD). Sixty patients with ASD underwent surgery; 34 had SRS-Schwab type L lumbar curve. Patients with a coronal balance distance (CBD) ≥20 mm were diagnosed with CM. Using the Obeid CM classification, we classified the preoperative coronal pattern as concave CM (type 1) or convex CM (type 2). Demographic, surgical, and radiological parameters were compared. Whole-spine standing radiographs were assessed preoperatively and postoperatively. Twenty-three patients had type 1A, six had type 2A, five had no CM, and none had type 1B or 2B according to the Obeid CM classification. Compared with patients with Obeid type 1A, those with Obeid type 2A had significantly higher preoperative and postoperative coronal L4 tilts and a smaller change in corrected CBD (Δ|CBD|) (76.6 mm vs. 24.1 mm, p < 0.001). At the final follow-up, 58.6% (17/29 patients) of patients with SRS-Schwab type L CM showed improvement after corrective fusion using LLIF. Although the difference was not statistically significant, CM improved in 69.6% (16/23 patients) of patients with Obeid type 1A type but only 16.7% (1/6 patients) of those with Obeid type 2A type (p = 0.056). CM was more likely to remain after anteroposterior staged surgery using LLIF in patients with preoperative Obeid type 2A ASD.

The Obeid-coronal malalignment classification is reliable and helps guiding decision-making and surgical management of adult spinal deformities: letter to the editor of BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders

A recently published article by Zhang et al. in BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders reported that the classification of coronal deformity based on preoperative global coronal malalignment for adult spinal deformity is questionable. The aim of the paper was to specifically discredit the Obeid-Coronal Malalignment (O-CM) classification. In this correspondence, we thought it judicious to clarify misunderstood concepts by the authors. We highlight several limitations of their study, and explain the deep interest of the classification from our perspective in order to avoid misleading the readers. Overarching, we aim to help the colleagues through a constructive rather than destructive approach to better understand the foundations of a coronal malalignment classification.

Evaluation of coronal alignment from the skull using the novel orbital-coronal vertical axis line

OBJECTIVE

When treating patients with adult spinal deformity (ASD), radiographic measurements evaluating coronal alignment above C7 are lacking. The current objectives were to: 1) describe the new orbital-coronal vertical axis (ORB-CVA) line that evaluates coronal alignment from cranium to sacrum, 2) assess correlation with other radiographic variables, 3) evaluate correlations with patient-reported outcomes (PROs), and 4) compare the ORB-CVA with the standard C7-CVA.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study of patients with ASD from a single institution was undertaken. Traditional C7-CVA measurements were obtained. The ORB-CVA was defined as the distance between the central sacral vertical line and the vertical line from the midpoint between the medial orbital walls. The ORB-CVA was correlated using traditional coronal measurements, including C7-CVA, maximum coronal Cobb angle, pelvic obliquity, leg length discrepancy (LLD), and coronal malalignment (CM), defined as a C7-CVA > 3 cm. Clinical improvement was analyzed as: 1) group means, 2) minimal clinically important difference (MCID), and 3) minimal symptom scale (MSS) (Oswestry Disability Index < 20 or Scoliosis Research Society-22r Instrument [SRS-22r] pain + function domains > 8).

RESULTS

A total of 243 patients underwent ASD surgery, and 175 had a 2-year follow-up. Of the 243 patients, 90 (37%) had preoperative CM. The mean (range) ORB-CVA at each time point was as follows: preoperatively, 2.9 ± 3.1 cm (-14.2 to 25.6 cm); 1 year postoperatively, 2.0 ± 1.6 cm (-12.4 to 6.7 cm); and 2 years postoperatively, 1.8 ± 1.7 cm (-6.0 to 11.1 cm) (p < 0.001 from preoperatively to 1 and 2 years). Preoperative ORB-CVA correlated best with C7-CVA (r = 0.842, p < 0.001), maximum coronal Cobb angle (r = 0.166, p = 0.010), pelvic obliquity (r = 0.293, p < 0.001), and LLD (r = 0.158, p = 0.006). Postoperatively, the ORB-CVA correlated only with C7-CVA (r = 0.629, p < 0.001) and LLD (r = 0.153, p = 0.017). Overall, 155 patients (63.8%) had an ORB-CVA that was ≥ 5 mm different from C7-CVA. The ORB-CVA correlated as well and sometimes better than C7-CVA with SRS-22r subdomains. After multivariate logistic regression, a greater ORB-CVA was associated with increased odds of complication, whereas C7-CVA was not associated with any of the three clinical outcomes (complication, readmission, reoperation). A larger difference between the ORB-CVA and C7-CVA was significantly associated with readmission and reoperation after univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses. A threshold of ≥ 1.5-cm difference between the preoperative ORB-CVA and C7-CVA was found to be predictive of poorer outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

The ORB-CVA correlated well with known coronal measurements and PROs. ORB-CVA was independently associated with increased odds of complication, whereas C7-CVA was not associated with any outcomes. A ≥ 1.5-cm difference between the preoperative ORB-CVA and C7-CVA was found to be predictive of poorer outcomes.

Understanding the role of pelvic obliquity and leg length discrepancy in adult spinal deformity patients with coronal malalignment: unlocking the black box

OBJECTIVE

This study had 3 objectives: 1) to describe pelvic obliquity (PO) and leg-length discrepancy (LLD) and their relationship with coronal malalignment (CM); 2) to report rates of isolated PO and PO secondary to LLD; and 3) to assess the importance of preoperative PO and LLD in postoperative complications, readmission, reoperation, and patient-reported outcomes.

METHODS

Patients undergoing surgery (≥ 6-level fusions) for adult spinal deformity at a single institution were reviewed. Variables evaluated were as follows: 1) PO, angle between the horizontal plane and a line touching bilateral iliac crests; and 2) LLD, distance from the head to the tibial plafond. Coronal vertical axis (CVA) and sagittal vertical axis measurements were collected, both from C7. The cutoff for CM was CVA > 3 cm. The Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) was collected preoperatively and at 2 years.

RESULTS

Of 242 patients undergoing surgery for adult spinal deformity, 90 (37.0%) had preoperative CM. Patients with preoperative CM had a higher PO (2.8° ± 3.2° vs 2.0° ± 1.7°, p = 0.013), a higher percentage of patients with PO > 3° (35.6% vs 23.5%, p = 0.044), and higher a percentage of patients with LLD > 1 cm (21.1% vs 9.8%, p = 0.014). Whereas preoperative PO was significantly positively correlated with CVA (r = 0.26, p < 0.001) and maximum Cobb angle (r = 0.30, p < 0.001), preoperative LLD was only significantly correlated with CVA (r = 0.14, p = 0.035). A total of 12.2% of patients with CM had significant PO and LLD, defined as follows: PO ≥ 3°; LLD ≥ 1 cm. Postoperatively, preoperative PO was significantly associated with both postoperative CM (OR 1.22, 95% CI 1.05-1.40, p = 0.008) and postoperative CVA (β = 0.14, 95% CI 0.06-0.22, p < 0.001). A higher preoperative PO was independently associated with postoperative complications after multivariate logistic regression (OR 1.24, 95% CI 1.05-1.45, p = 0.010); however, 2-year ODI scores were not. Preoperative LLD had no significant relationship with postoperative CM, CVA, ODI, or complications.

CONCLUSIONS

A PO ≥ 3° or LLD ≥ 1 cm was seen in 44.1% of patients with preoperative CM and in 23.5% of patients with normal coronal alignment. Preoperative PO was significantly associated with preoperative CVA and maximum Cobb angle, whereas preoperative LLD was only associated with preoperative CVA. The direction of PO and LLD showed no consistent pattern with CVA. Preoperative PO was independently associated with complications but not with 2-year ODI scores.

Coronal Alignment in Adult Spinal Deformity Surgery: Definitions, Measurements, Treatment Algorithms, and Impact on Clinical Outcomes

The major focus of realignment in adult spinal deformity (ASD) surgery has been on the sagittal plane, and less emphasis has been given to the coronal plane. In light of this overlooked area within ASD surgery, we aimed to refocus the narrative on coronal alignment in ASD surgery. The objectives of the current narrative review were to (1) define coronal alignment and discuss existing measurements; (2) report the incidence and prevalence of coronal malalignment (CM); (3) discuss the impact of CM on clinical outcomes; and (4) describe our preferred treatment algorithm of surgical correction of CM in ASD.

Incidence and risk factors of iatrogenic coronal malalignment after adult spinal deformity surgery: a single-center experience

OBJECTIVE

The authors' objectives were: 1) to evaluate the incidence and risk factors of iatrogenic coronal malalignment (CM), and 2) to assess the outcomes of patients with all three types of postoperative CM (iatrogenic vs unchanged/worsened vs improved but persistent).

METHODS

A single-institution, retrospective cohort study was performed on adult spinal deformity (ASD) patients who underwent > 6-level fusion from 2015 to 2019. Iatrogenic CM was defined as immediate postoperative C7 coronal vertical axis (CVA) ≥ 3 cm in patients with preoperative CVA < 3 cm. Additional subcategories of postoperative CM were unchanged/worsened CM, which was defined as immediate postoperative CVA within 0.5 cm of or worse than preoperative CVA, and improved but persistent CM, which was defined as immediate postoperative CVA that was at least 0.5 cm better than preoperative CVA but still ≥ 3 cm; both groups included only patients with preoperative CM. Immediate postoperative radiographs were obtained when the patient was discharged from the hospital after surgery. Demographic, radiographic, and operative variables were collected. Outcomes included major complications, readmissions, reoperations, and patient-reported outcomes (PROs). The t-test, Kruskal-Wallis test, and univariate logistic regression were performed for statistical analysis.

RESULTS

In this study, 243 patients were included, and the mean ± SD age was 49.3 ± 18.3 years and the mean number of instrumented levels was 13.5 ± 3.9. The mean preoperative CVA was 2.9 ± 2.7 cm. Of 153/243 patients without preoperative CM (CVA < 3 cm), 13/153 (8.5%) had postoperative iatrogenic CM. In total, 43/243 patients (17.7%) had postoperative CM: iatrogenic CM (13/43 [30.2%]), unchanged/worsened CM (19/43 [44.2%]), and improved but persistent CM (11/43 [25.6%]). Significant risk factors associated with iatrogenic CM were anxiety/depression (OR 3.54, p = 0.04), greater preoperative sagittal vertical axis (SVA) (OR 1.13, p = 0.007), greater preoperative pelvic obliquity (OR 1.41, p = 0.019), lumbosacral fractional (LSF) curve concavity to the same side of the CVA (OR 11.67, p = 0.020), maximum Cobb concavity opposite the CVA (OR 3.85, p = 0.048), and three-column osteotomy (OR 4.34, p = 0.028). In total, 12/13 (92%) iatrogenic CM patients had an LSF curve concavity to the same side as the CVA. Among iatrogenic CM patients, mean pelvic obliquity was 3.1°, 4 (31%) patients had pelvic obliquity > 3°, mean preoperative absolute SVA was 8.0 cm, and 7 (54%) patients had preoperative sagittal malalignment. Patients with iatrogenic CM were more likely to sustain a major complication during the 2-year postoperative period than patients without iatrogenic CM (12% vs 33%, p = 0.046), yet readmission, reoperation, and PROs were similar.

CONCLUSIONS

Postoperative iatrogenic CM occurred in 9% of ASD patients with preoperative normal coronal alignment (CVA < 3 cm). ASD patients who were most at risk for iatrogenic CM included those with preoperative sagittal malalignment, increased pelvic obliquity, LSF curve concavity to the same side as the CVA, and maximum Cobb angle concavity opposite the CVA, as well as those who underwent a three-column osteotomy. Despite sustaining more major complications, iatrogenic CM patients did not have increased risk of readmission, reoperation, or worse PROs.

Obeid-Coronal Malalignment Classification Is Age Related and Independently Associated to Personal Reported Outcome Measurement Scores in the Nonfused Spine

Objective

To evaluate Obeid-coronal malalignment (O-CM) modifiers according to age, sagittal alignment, and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), in the mobile spine.

Methods

Retrospective review of a prospective multicenter adult spinal deformity (ASD) database with 1,243 (402 nonoperative, 841 operative) patients with no prior fusion surgery. Patients were included if they were aged over 18 years and were affected by spinal deformity defined by one of: Cobb angle ≥ 20°, pelvic tilt ≥ 25°, sagittal vertical axis ≥ 5 cm, thoracic kyphosis ≥ 60°. Patients were classified according to the O-CM classification and compared to coronally aligned patients. Multivariate analysis was performed on the relationship between PROMs and age, global tilt (GT) and coronal malalignment (CM).

Results

Four hundred forty-three patients had CM of more than 2 cm compared to 800 who did not. The distribution of these modifiers was correlated to age. After multivariate analysis, using age and GT as confounding factors, we found that before the age of 50 years, 2A1 patients had worse sex life and greater satisfaction than patients without CM. After 50 years of age, patients with CM (1A1, 1A2) had worse self-image and those with 2A2, 2B had worse self-image, satisfaction, and 36-item Short Form Health Survey physical function. Self-image was the consistent determinant of patients opting for surgery for all ages.

Conclusion

CM distribution according to O-CM modifiers is age dependent. A clear correlation between the coronal malalignment and PROMs exists when using the O-CM classification and in the mobile spine, this typically affects self-image and satisfaction. Thus, CM classified according to O-CM modifiers is correlated to PROMs and should be considered in ASD.

Be Prepared: Preoperative Coronal Malalignment Often Leads to More Extensive Surgery Than Sagittal Malalignment During Adult Spinal Deformity Surgery

Objective

To evaluate the effect of coronal alignment on: (1) surgical invasiveness and operative complexity and (2) postoperative complications.

Methods

A retrospective, cohort study of adult spinal deformity patients was conducted. Alignment groups were: (1) neutral alignment (NA): coronal vertical axis (CVA) ≤ 3 cm and sagittal vertical axis (SVA) ≤ 5 cm; (2) coronal malalignment (CM) only: CVA > 3 cm; (3) Sagittal malalignment (SM) only: SVA > 5 cm; and (4) coronal and sagittal malalignment (CCSM): CVA > 3 cm and SVA > 5 cm.

Results

Of 243 patients, alignment groups were: NA 115 (47.3%), CM 48 (19.8%), SM 38 (15.6%), and CCSM 42 (17.3%). Total instrumented levels (TILs) were highest in CM (14.5±3.7) and CCSM groups (14±4.0) (p<0.001). More 3-column osteotomies (3COs) were performed in SM (21.1%) and CCSM (28.9%) groups than CM (10.4%) (p=0.003). CM patients had more levels instrumented (p=0.029), posterior column osteotomies (PCOs) (p<0.001), and TLIFs (p=0.002) than SM patients. CCSM patients had more TLIFs (p=0.012) and higher estimated blood loss (EBL) (p=0.003) than SM patients. CVA displayed a stronger relationship with TIL (p=0.002), EBL (p<0.001), and operative time (p<0.001) than SVA, which had only one significant association with EBL (p=0.010). Both SM/CCSM patients had higher readmissions (p=0.003) and reoperations (p<0.001) than CM patients.

Conclusion

Amount of preoperative CM was a better predictor of surgical invasiveness than the amount of SM, despite 3COs more commonly performed in SM patients. CM patients had more instrumented levels, PCOs, and TLIFs than SM patients.

Global coronal decompensation and adult spinal deformity surgery: comparison of upper-thoracic versus lower-thoracic proximal fixation for long fusions

OBJECTIVE

Deterioration of global coronal alignment (GCA) may be associated with worse outcomes after adult spinal deformity (ASD) surgery. The impact of fusion length and upper instrumented vertebra (UIV) selection on patients with this complication is unclear. The authors' objective was to compare outcomes between long sacropelvic fusion with upper-thoracic (UT) UIV and those with lower-thoracic (LT) UIV in patients with worsening GCA ≥ 1 cm.

METHODS

This was a retrospective analysis of a prospective multicenter database of consecutive ASD patients. Index operations involved instrumented fusion from sacropelvis to thoracic spine. Global coronal deterioration was defined as worsening GCA ≥ 1 cm from preoperation to 2-year follow-up.

RESULTS

Of 875 potentially eligible patients, 560 (64%) had complete 2-year follow-up data, of which 144 (25.7%) demonstrated worse GCA at 2-year postoperative follow-up (35.4% of UT patients vs 64.6% of LT patients). At baseline, UT patients were younger (61.6 ± 9.9 vs 64.5 ± 8.6 years, p = 0.008), a greater percentage of UT patients had osteoporosis (35.3% vs 16.1%, p = 0.009), and UT patients had worse scoliosis (51.9° ± 22.5° vs 32.5° ± 16.3°, p < 0.001). Index operations were comparable, except UT patients had longer fusions (16.4 ± 0.9 vs 9.7 ± 1.2 levels, p < 0.001) and operative duration (8.6 ± 3.2 vs 7.6 ± 3.0 hours, p = 0.023). At 2-year follow-up, global coronal deterioration averaged 2.7 ± 1.4 cm (1.9 to 4.6 cm, p < 0.001), scoliosis improved (39.3° ± 20.8° to 18.0° ± 14.8°, p < 0.001), and sagittal spinopelvic alignment improved significantly in all patients. UT patients maintained smaller positive C7 sagittal vertical axis (2.7 ± 5.7 vs 4.7 ± 5.7 cm, p = 0.014). Postoperative 2-year health-related quality of life (HRQL) significantly improved from baseline for all patients. HRQL comparisons demonstrated that UT patients had worse Scoliosis Research Society-22r (SRS-22r) Activity (3.2 ± 1.0 vs 3.6 ± 0.8, p = 0.040) and SRS-22r Satisfaction (3.9 ± 1.1 vs 4.3 ± 0.8, p = 0.021) scores. Also, fewer UT patients improved by ≥ 1 minimal clinically important difference in numerical rating scale scores for leg pain (41.3% vs 62.7%, p = 0.020). Comparable percentages of UT and LT patients had complications (208 total, including 53 reoperations, 77 major complications, and 78 minor complications), but the percentage of reoperated patients was higher among UT patients (35.3% vs 18.3%, p = 0.023). UT patients had higher reoperation rates of rod fracture (13.7% vs 2.2%, p = 0.006) and pseudarthrosis (7.8% vs 1.1%, p = 0.006) but not proximal junctional kyphosis (9.8% vs 8.6%, p = 0.810).

CONCLUSIONS

In ASD patients with worse 2-year GCA after long sacropelvic fusion, UT UIV was associated with worse 2-year HRQL compared with LT UIV. This may suggest that residual global coronal malalignment is clinically less tolerated in ASD patients with longer fusion to the proximal thoracic spine. These results may inform operative planning and improve patient counseling.

Multicenter assessment of outcomes and complications associated with transforaminal versus anterior lumbar interbody fusion for fractional curve correction

OBJECTIVE

Few studies have compared fractional curve correction after long fusion between transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) and anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) for adult symptomatic thoracolumbar/lumbar scoliosis (ASLS). The objective of this study was to compare fractional correction, health-related quality of life (HRQL), and complications associated with L4-S1 TLIF versus those of ALIF as an operative treatment of ASLS.

METHODS

The authors retrospectively analyzed a prospective multicenter adult spinal deformity database. Inclusion required a fractional curve ≥ 10°, a thoracolumbar/lumbar curve ≥ 30°, index TLIF or ALIF performed at L4-5 and/or L5-S1, and a minimum 2-year follow-up. TLIF and ALIF patients were propensity matched according to the number and type of interbody fusion at L4-S1.

RESULTS

Of 135 potentially eligible consecutive patients, 106 (78.5%) achieved the minimum 2-year follow-up (mean ± SD age 60.6 ± 9.3 years, 85% women, 44.3% underwent TLIF, and 55.7% underwent ALIF). Index operations had mean ± SD 12.2 ± 3.6 posterior levels, 86.6% of patients underwent iliac fixation, 67.0% underwent TLIF/ALIF at L4-5, and 84.0% underwent TLIF/ALIF at L5-S1. Compared with TLIF patients, ALIF patients had greater cage height (10.9 ± 2.1 mm for TLIF patients vs 14.5 ± 3.0 mm for ALIF patients, p = 0.001) and lordosis (6.3° ± 1.6° for TLIF patients vs 17.0° ± 9.9° for ALIF patients, p = 0.001) and longer operative duration (6.7 ± 1.5 hours for TLIF patients vs 8.9 ± 2.5 hours for ALIF patients, p < 0.001). In all patients, final alignment improved significantly in terms of the fractional curve (20.2° ± 7.0° to 6.9° ± 5.2°), maximum coronal Cobb angle (55.0° ± 14.8° to 23.9° ± 14.3°), C7 sagittal vertical axis (5.1 ± 6.2 cm to 2.3 ± 5.4 cm), pelvic tilt (24.6° ± 8.1° to 22.7° ± 9.5°), and lumbar lordosis (32.3° ± 18.8° to 51.4° ± 14.1°) (all p < 0.05). Matched analysis demonstrated comparable fractional correction (-13.6° ± 6.7° for TLIF patients vs -13.6° ± 8.1° for ALIF patients, p = 0.982). In all patients, final HRQL improved significantly in terms of Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) score (42.4 ± 16.3 to 24.2 ± 19.9), physical component summary (PCS) score of the 36-item Short-Form Health Survey (32.6 ± 9.3 to 41.3 ± 11.7), and Scoliosis Research Society-22r score (2.9 ± 0.6 to 3.7 ± 0.7) (all p < 0.05). Matched analysis demonstrated worse ODI (30.9 ± 21.1 for TLIF patients vs 17.9 ± 17.1 for ALIF patients, p = 0.017) and PCS (38.3 ± 12.0 for TLIF patients vs 45.3 ± 10.1 for ALIF patients, p = 0.020) scores for TLIF patients at the last follow-up (despite no differences in these parameters at baseline). The rates of total complications were similar (76.6% for TLIF patients vs 71.2% for ALIF patients, p = 0.530), but significantly more TLIF patients had rod fracture (28.6% of TLIF patients vs 7.1% of ALIF patients, p = 0.036). Multiple regression analysis demonstrated that a 1-mm increase in L4-5 TLIF cage height led to a 2.2° reduction in L4 coronal tilt (p = 0.011), and a 1° increase in L5-S1 ALIF cage lordosis led to a 0.4° increase in L5-S1 segmental lordosis (p = 0.045).

CONCLUSIONS

Operative treatment of ASLS with L4-S1 TLIF versus ALIF demonstrated comparable mean fractional curve correction (66.7% vs 64.8%), despite use of significantly larger, more lordotic ALIF cages. TLIF cage height had a significant impact on leveling L4 coronal tilt, whereas ALIF cage lordosis had a significant impact on restoration of lumbosacral lordosis. The advantages of TLIF may include reduced operative duration and hospitalization; however, associated HRQL was inferior and more rod fractures were detected in the TLIF patients included in this study.

Do Adult Spinal Deformity Patients Undergoing Surgery Continue to Improve From 1-Year to 2-Years Postoperative?

OBJECTIVE

Evaluate clinical improvement as measured by patient-reported outcomes (PROs) during the 1 to 2-year interval.

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective Cohort.

METHODS

A single-institution registry of ASD patients undergoing surgery was queried for patients with ≥6 level fusions. Demographics and radiographic variables were collected. PROs collected were the ODI and SRS-22r scores at: preoperative, 1-year and 2-years. Outcome measures of clinical improvement during the 1-2 year time interval were: 1) group medians, 2) percent minimum clinically important difference (MCID), and 3) percent minimal symptom scale (MSS)(ODI < 20 or SRS-pain + function >8). Wilcoxon rank-sum tests, chi-squared tests, Kruskal-Wallis tests, and logistic regression were performed.

RESULTS

157 patients undergoing ASD surgery with minimum of 1-year follow-up were included. Mean age was 53.2 and mean instrumented levels was 13.1. Preoperative alignment was: Neutral Alignment (NA) 49%, Coronal Malalignment (CM) 17%, Sagittal Malalignment (SM 17%), and Combined Coronal/Sagittal Malalignment (CCSM) 18%. Preoperative to 1-year, and preoperative to 2-years, all ODI/SRS-22r significantly improved (P < .001). In all patients, the only significant improvement in PROs between 1-and 2-year postoperative were those reaching ODI MCID (69% 1-year vs. 84% 2-years; P < .001). Subgroup analysis: ≥55 years had an improved median ODI (18 vs. 8; P = .047) and an improved percent achieving ODI MCID (73% vs. 84%, P = .048). CCSM patients experienced significant improvement in SRS-appearance score (75% vs. 100%; P = .050), along with those with severe preoperative SM >7.5 cm (73% vs. 100%; P = .032).

CONCLUSIONS

Most ASD patients experience the majority of PRO improvement by 1-year postoperative. However, subsets of patients that may continue to improve up to 2-years postoperative include patients ≥55 years, combined coronal/sagittal malalignment, and those with severe sagittal malalignment ≥7.5 cm.

The odontoid-CSVL distance in a global population of asymptomatic volunteers: normative values and implications for spinal coronal alignment

PURPOSE

In a population of asymptomatic volunteers across 5 countries, we sought to: (a) establish normative values of the Odontoid-Central Sacral Vertical Line (OD-CSVL) across patient factors, and (b) assess correlations of OD-CSVL with other radiographic parameters.

METHODS

A prospective, cross-sectional study of asymptomatic adult volunteers, ages 18-80 years, were enrolled across 5 countries (France, Japan, Singapore, Tunisia, United States) forming the Multi-Ethnic Alignment Normative Study (MEANS) cohort. Included volunteers had no known spinal disorder(s), no significant neck/back pain (VAS ≤ 2; ODI ≤ 20), and no significant scoliosis (Cobb ≤ 20°). Radiographic measurements included commonly used coronal alignment parameters (mm) and angles (°). OD-CSVL was defined as the difference between the odontoid plumb line (line from the tip of the odontoid vertically down) and the CSVL (vertical line from the center of the sacrum). Chi-square, student's t tests, Kruskal-Wallis, Wilcoxon rank-sum, linear regression, and Pearson's correlation were used with significance at p < 0.05.

RESULTS

467 volunteers were included with normative OD-CSVL values by age decade, gender, BMI, and country. Mean ± SD OD-CSVL was 8.3 mm ± 6.5 mm and 31 (6.6%) volunteers were almost perfectly aligned (OD-CSVL < 1 mm). A linear relationship was seen between OD-CSVL with both age (p < 0.001) and BMI (p = 0.015). Significant variation was seen between OD-CSVL and 5 different ethnicities (p = 0.004). OD-CSVL correlated best with other coronal radiographic parameters, C7-CSVL (r = 0.743, p < 0.001), OD-knee (r = 0.230, p < 0.001), CAM-knee (r = 0.612, p < 0.001), and regional TL cobb angle (r = 0.4214, p = 0.005).

CONCLUSION

Among asymptomatic volunteers, increased OD-CSVL was significantly associated with increased age, increased BMI, and ethnicity, but not gender. OD-CSVL correlated strongest with C7-CSVL, TL cobb angle, OD-knee, and CAM-knee. OD-CSVL. These results support further study of OD-CSVL in symptomatic adult spine deformity patients.

Multicenter assessment of surgical outcomes in adult spinal deformity patients with severe global coronal malalignment: determination of target coronal realignment threshold

OBJECTIVE

The impact of global coronal malalignment (GCM; C7 plumb line-midsacral offset) on adult spinal deformity (ASD) treatment outcomes is unclear. Here, the authors' primary objective was to assess surgical outcomes and complications in patients with severe GCM, with a secondary aim of investigating potential surgical target coronal thresholds for optimal outcomes.

METHODS

This is a retrospective analysis of a prospective multicenter database. Operative patients with severe GCM (≥ 1 SD above the mean) and a minimum 2-year follow-up were identified. Demographic, surgical, radiographic, health-related quality of life (HRQOL), and complications data were analyzed.

RESULTS

Of 691 potentially eligible operative patients (mean GCM 4 ± 3 cm), 80 met the criteria for severe GCM ≥ 7 cm. Of these, 62 (78%; mean age 63.7 ± 10.7 years, 81% women) had a minimum 2-year follow-up (mean follow-up 3.3 ± 1.1 years). The mean ASD-Frailty Index was 3.9 ± 1.5 (frail), 50% had undergone prior fusion, and 81% had concurrent severe sagittal spinopelvic deformity with GCM and C7-S1 sagittal vertical axis (SVA) positively correlated (r = 0.313, p = 0.015). Surgical characteristics included posterior-only (58%) versus anterior-posterior (42%) approach, mean fusion of 13.2 ± 3.8 levels, iliac fixation (90%), 3-column osteotomy (36%), operative duration of 8.3 ± 3.0 hours, and estimated blood loss of 2.3 ± 1.7 L. Final alignment and HRQOL significantly improved (p < 0.01): GCM, 11 to 4 cm; maximum coronal Cobb angle, 43° to 20°; SVA, 13 to 4 cm; pelvic tilt, 29° to 23°; pelvic incidence-lumbar lordosis mismatch, 31° to 5°; Oswestry Disability Index, 51 to 37; physical component summary of SF-36 (PCS), 29 to 37; 22-Item Scoliosis Research Society Patient Questionnaire (SRS-22r) Total, 2.6 to 3.5; and numeric rating scale score for back and leg pain, 7 to 4 and 5 to 3, respectively. Residual GCM ≥ 3 cm was associated with worse SRS-22r Appearance (p = 0.04) and SRS-22r Satisfaction (p = 0.02). The minimal clinically important difference and/or substantial clinical benefit (MCID/SCB) was met in 43%-83% (highest for SRS-22r Appearance [MCID 83%] and PCS [SCB 53%]). The severity of baseline GCM (≥ 2 SD above the mean) significantly impacted postoperative SRS-22r Satisfaction and MCID/SCB improvement for PCS. No significant partial correlations were demonstrated between GCM or SVA correction and HRQOL improvement. There were 89 total complications (34 minor and 55 major), 45 (73%) patients with ≥ 1 complication (most commonly rod fracture [19%] and proximal junctional kyphosis [PJK; 18%]), and 34 reoperations in 22 (35%) patients (most commonly for rod fracture and PJK).

CONCLUSIONS

Study results demonstrated that ASD surgery in patients with substantial GCM was associated with significant radiographic and HRQOL improvement despite high complication rates. MCID improvement was highest for SRS-22r Appearance/Self-Image. A residual GCM ≥ 3 cm was associated with a worse outcome, suggesting a potential coronal realignment target threshold to assist surgical planning.

The role of radiography in the study of spinal disorders

Despite the growing use of computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in the study of spinal disorders, radiography still plays an important role in many conditions affecting the spine. However, the study and interpretation of spine radiograph is receiving less attention and radiologists are increasingly unfamiliar with the typical findings in normal and pathologic conditions of the spine. The aim of this article is to review the radiologic indications of radiograph in different pathologic conditions that affect the spine, including congenital, traumatic, degenerative, inflammatory, infectious and tumour disorders, as well as their main radiographic manifestations.

Posterior column osteotomy plus unilateral cage strutting for correction of lumbosacral fractional curve in degenerative lumbar scoliosis

Background

Inadequate release of the posterior spinal bone elements may hinder the correction of the lumbosacral fractional curve in degenerative lumbar scoliosis, since the lumbosacral junction tends to be particularly rigid and may already be fused into an abnormal position. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the surgical outcome and complications of posterior column osteotomy plus unilateral cage strutting technique on lumbosacral concavity for correction of fractional curve in degenerative lumbar scoliosis patients.

Methods

Thirty-two degenerative lumbar scoliosis patients with lumbosacral fractional curve more than 15° that were surgically treated by posterior column osteotomy plus unilateral cage strutting technique were retrospectively reviewed. The patients’ medical records were reviewed to identify demographic and surgical data, including age, sex, body mass index, back pain, leg pain, Oswestry Disability Index, operation time, blood loss, and instrumentation levels. Radiological data including coronal balance distance, Cobb angle, lumbosacral coronal angle, sagittal vertical axis, lumbar lordosis, and lumbosacral lordotic angle were evaluated before and after surgery. Cage subsidence and bone fusion were evaluated at 2-year follow-up.

Results

All patients underwent the operation successfully; lumbosacral coronal angle changed from preoperative 20.1 ± 5.3° to postoperative 5.8 ± 5.7°, with mean correction of 14.3 ± 4.4°, and the correction was maintained at 2-year follow-up. Cobb’s angle and coronal balance distance decreased from preoperative to postoperative; the correction was maintained at 2-year follow-up. Sagittal vertical axis decreased, and lumbar lordosis increased from preoperative to postoperative; the correction was also maintained at 2-year follow-up. Lumbosacral lordotic angle presented no change from preoperative to postoperative and from postoperative to 2-year follow-up. Postoperatively, there were 8 patients with lumbosacral coronal angle more than 10°, they got the similar lumbosacral coronal angle correction, but presented larger preoperative Cobb and lumbosacral coronal angle than the other 24 patients. No cage subsidence was detected; all patients achieved intervertebral bone fusion and inter-transverse bone graft fusion at the lumbosacral region at 2-year follow-up.

Conclusion

Posterior column osteotomy plus unilateral cage strutting technique on the lumbosacral concavity facilitate effective correction of the fractional curve in degenerative lumbar scoliosis patients through complete release of dural sac as well as the asymmetrical intervertebral reconstruction by cage.