Faculty Bibliography

Metabolic syndrome is a clustering of clinical findings defined in the literature including hypertension, high glucose, abdominal obesity, high triglyceride, and low high-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels. The purpose of this study was to assess perioperative outcomes in patients undergoing spine fusion surgery with (MetS) and without (no-MetS) a history of metabolic syndrome. Included: Patients ≥18 yrs old undergoing spine fusion procedures diagnosed with MetS components with BL and 1-year follow-up were isolated in a single-center database. Patients in the two groups were propensity score matched for levels fused. 250 spine fusion patients (58 yrs, 52.2%F, 39.0 kg/m²) with an average CCI of 1.92 were analyzed. 125 patients were classified with MetS (60.2 yrs, 52%F, CCI: 3.2). MetS patients were significantly older (p = 0.012). MetS patients underwent significantly more open (Met-S: 78.4% vs No-MetS: 45.6%, p < 0.001) and posterior approached procedures (Met-S: 60.8% vs No-MetS: 47.2%, p = 0.031). Mean operative time: 272.4 ± 150 min (MetS: 288.1 min vs. no-MetS: 259.7; p = 0.089). Average length of stay: 4.6 days (MetS: 5.27 vs no-MetS: 3.95; p = 0.095). MetS patients had more post-operative complications (29.6% vs. 18.4%; p = 0.038), specifically neuro (6.4% vs 2.4%), pulmonary (4% vs. 1.6%), and urinary (4.8% vs 2.4%) complications. Binary logistic regression analyses found that MetS was an independent risk factor for post-operative complications (OR: 1.865 [1.030-3.375], p = 0.040). With longer surgeries and greater open-exposure types, MetS patients were at greater risk for complications, despite controlling for total number of levels fused. Surgeons should be aware of the increased threat to spine surgery patients with metabolic syndrome in order to optimize surgical decision-making.

STUDY DESIGN/METHODS:Retrospective review. OBJECTIVE:The aim of this study was to develop a novel surgical invasiveness index for cervical deformity (CD) surgery that incorporates CD-specific parameters. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA/BACKGROUND:There has been a surgical invasiveness index for general spine surgery and adult spinal deformity, but a CD index has not been developed. METHODS:CD was defined as at least one of the following: C2-C7 Cobb > 10°, cervical lordosis (CL) > 10°, cervical sagittal vertical axis (cSVA) > 4 cm, chin brow vertical angle (CBVA) > 25°. Consensus from experienced spine and neurosurgeons selected weightings for each variable that went into the invasiveness index. Binary logistic regression predicted high operative time (>338 minutes), estimated blood loss (EBL) (>600 cc), or length of stay (LOS; > 5 days) based on the median values of operative time, EBL and LOS. Multivariable regression modeling was utilized to construct a final model incorporating the strongest combination of factors to predict operative time, LOS, and EBL. RESULTS:85 CD patients were included (61yrs, 66%F). The variables in the newly developed CD invasiveness index with their corresponding weightings were: history of prior cervical surgery (3), anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) (2/level), corpectomy (4/level), levels fused (1/level), implants (1/level), posterior decompression (2/level), Smith-Peterson osteotomy (2/level), three column osteotomy (8/level), fusion to upper cervical spine (2), absolute change in T1 slope minus cervical lordosis (TS-CL), cSVA, T4-T12 thoracic kyphosis and sagittal vertical axis (SVA) from baseline to 1-year. The newly developed CD-specific invasiveness index strongly predicted long LOS (R = 0.310, p < 0.001), high EBL (R = 0.170, p = 0.011), and extended operative time (R = 0.207, p = 0.031). A second analysis used multivariable regression modeling to determine which combination of factors in the newly developed index were the strongest determinants of operative time, LOS, and EBL. The final predictive model included: number of corpectomies, levels fused, decompression, combined approach, and absolute changes in SVA, cSVA and TK. This model predicted EBL (R = 0.26), operative time (R = 0.12), and LOS (R = 0.13). CONCLUSIONS:Extended length of stay, operative time, and high blood loss were strongly predicted by the newly developed CD invasiveness index, incorporating surgical factors and radiographic parameters clinically relevant for patients undergoing cervical deformity corrective surgery. LEVELS OF EVIDENCE/METHODS:4.

BACKGROUND:Distal junctional kyphosis (DJK) development after cervical deformity (CD)-corrective surgery is a growing concern for surgeons and patients. Few studies have investigated risk factors that predict the occurrence of DJK. OBJECTIVE:To predict DJK development after CD surgery using predictive modeling. METHODS:CD criteria was at least one of the following: C2-C7 Coronal/Cobb > 10°, C2-7 sagittal vertical axis (cSVA) > 4 cm, chin-brow vertical angle > 25°. DJK was defined as the development of an angle <-10° from the end of fusion construct to the second distal vertebra, and change in this angle by <-10° from baseline to postoperative. Baseline demographic, clinical, and surgical information were used to predict the occurrence of DJK using generalized linear modeling both as one overall model and as submodels using baseline demographic and clinical predictors or surgical predictors. RESULTS:One hundred seventeen CD patients were included. At any postoperative visit up to 1 yr, 23.1% of CD patients developed DJK. DJK was predicted with high accuracy using a combination of baseline demographic, clinical, and surgical factors by the following factors: preoperative neurological deficit, use of transition rod, C2-C7 lordosis (CL)<-12°, T1 slope minus CL > 31°, and cSVA > 54 mm. In the model using only baseline demographic/clinical predictors of DJK, presence of comorbidities, presence of baseline neurological deficit, and high preoperative C2-T3 angle were included in the final model (area under the curve = 87%). The final model using only surgical predictors for DJK included combined approach, posterior upper instrumented vertebrae below C4, use of transition rod, lack of anterior corpectomy, more than 3 posterior osteotomies, and performance of a 3-column osteotomy. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Preoperative assessment and consideration should be given to these factors that are predictive of DJK to mitigate poor outcomes.

OBJECTIVE:Optimal patient selection for upper-thoracic (UT) versus lower-thoracic (LT) fusion during adult spinal deformity (ASD) correction is challenging. Radiographic and clinical outcomes following UT versus LT fusion remain incompletely understood. The purposes of this study were: 1) to evaluate demographic, radiographic, and surgical characteristics associated with choice of UT versus LT fusion endpoint; and 2) to evaluate differences in radiographic, clinical, and health-related quality of life (HRQOL) outcomes following UT versus LT fusion for ASD. METHODS:Retrospective review of a prospectively collected multicenter ASD database was performed. Patients with ASD who underwent fusion from the sacrum/ilium to the LT (T9-L1) or UT (T1-6) spine were compared for demographic, radiographic, and surgical characteristics. Outcomes including proximal junctional kyphosis (PJK), reoperation, rod fracture, pseudarthrosis, overall complications, 2-year change in alignment parameters, and 2-year HRQOL metrics (Lumbar Stiffness Disability Index, Scoliosis Research Society-22r questionnaire, Oswestry Disability Index) were compared after controlling for confounding factors via multivariate analysis. RESULTS:Three hundred three patients (169 LT, 134 UT) were evaluated. Independent predictors of UT fusion included greater thoracic kyphosis (odds ratio [OR] 0.97 per degree, p = 0.0098), greater coronal Cobb angle (OR 1.06 per degree, p < 0.0001), and performance of a 3-column osteotomy (3-CO; OR 2.39, p = 0.0351). While associated with longer operative times (ratio 1.13, p < 0.0001) and greater estimated blood loss (ratio 1.31, p = 0.0018), UT fusions resulted in greater sagittal vertical axis improvement (-59.5 vs -41.0 mm, p = 0.0035) and lower PJK rates (OR 0.49, p = 0.0457). No significant differences in postoperative HRQOL measures, reoperation, or overall complication rates were detected between groups (all p > 0.1). CONCLUSIONS:Greater deformity and need for 3-CO increased the likelihood of UT fusion. Despite longer operative times and greater blood loss, UT fusions resulted in better sagittal correction and lower 2-year PJK rates following surgery for ASD. While continued surveillance is necessary, this information may inform patient counseling and surgical decision-making.

OBJECTIVE:Neck and back pain are highly prevalent conditions that account for major disability. The Neck Disability Index (NDI) and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) are the two most common functional status measures for neck and back pain. However, no single instrument exists to evaluate patients with concurrent neck and back pain. The recently developed Total Disability Index (TDI) combines overlapping elements from the ODI and NDI with the unique items from each. This study aimed to prospectively validate the TDI in patients with spinal deformity, back pain, and/or neck pain. METHODS:This study is a retrospective review of prospectively collected data from a single center. The 14-item TDI, derived from ODI and NDI domains, was administered to consecutive patients presenting to a spine practice. Patients were assessed using the ODI, NDI, and EQ-5D. Validation of internal consistency, test-retest reproducibility, and validity of reconstructed NDI and ODI scores derived from TDI were assessed. RESULTS:A total of 252 patients (mean age 55 years, 56% female) completed initial assessments (back pain, n = 115; neck pain, n = 52; back and neck pain, n = 55; spinal deformity, n = 55; and no pain/deformity, n = 29). Of these patients, 155 completed retests within 14 days. Patients represented a wide range of disability (mean ODI score: 36.3 ± 21.6; NDI score: 30.8 ± 21.8; and TDI score: 34.1 ± 20.0). TDI demonstrated excellent internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha = 0.922) and test-retest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.96). Differences between actual and reconstructed scores were not clinically significant. Subanalyses demonstrated TDI's ability to quantify the degree of disability due to back or neck pain in patients complaining of pain in both regions. CONCLUSIONS:The TDI is a valid and reliable disability measure in patients with back and/or neck pain and can capture each spine region's contribution to total disability. The TDI could be a valuable method for total spine assessment in a clinical setting, and its completion is less time consuming than that for both the ODI and NDI.

OBJECT/OBJECTIVE:The LSDI assesses the impact of lumbar stiffness on activities of daily living. We hypothesized that patients <60 years-old would perceive greater lumbar stiffness-related functional limitation following fusion for adult spinal deformity. METHODS:Patients completed the LSDI and SRS-22r questionnaires preoperatively and at 2 years postoperatively. The primary independent variable was patient age <60 vs. ≥60 years-old. Multivariable regression analyses were utilized. RESULTS:In total, 267 patients were analyzed. Patients <60 years-old (51.3%) and ≥60 years-old (48.7%) were evenly represented. In bivariable analysis, patients <60 years-old exhibited lower LSDI at baseline vs. patients ≥60 years-old (25.7 vs. 35.5, β -9.8, p<0.0001), but a directionally smaller difference at 2-years (26.4 vs. 32.3, β -5.8, p=0.0147). LSDI was associated with lower SRS-22r total score among both patients <60 and ≥60 years-old, at both baseline and 2-years (all p<0.0001); the association was stronger among patients <60 vs. ≥60 years-old at 2 years. LSDI was associated with SRS satisfaction scores at 2 years among patients <60 years-old (p<0.0001), but not patients ≥60 years-old (p=0.2250). The difference in SRS satisfaction per unit LSDI between patients <60 years-old and >60 years-old was significant (p=0.0021). CONCLUSIONS:Among ASD patients managed operatively, higher LSDI was associated with inferior SRS-22r total score and satisfaction at 2 years postoperatively. The association between increased LSDI and worse PROMs was greater among patients <60 vs. ≥60 years old. Pre-operative counseling is needed for patients <60 undergoing ASD surgery regarding the effects that lumbar stiffness may have on post-operative function and satisfaction.

OBJECTIVE:Cervical deformity (CD) is difficult to define due to the high variability in normal cervical alignment based on postural- and thoracolumbar-driven changes to cervical alignment. The purpose of this study was to identify whether patterns of sagittal deformity could be established based on neutral and dynamic alignment, as shown on radiographs. METHODS:This study is a retrospective review of a prospective, multicenter database of CD patients who underwent surgery from 2013 to 2015. Their radiographs were reviewed by 12 individuals using a consensus-based method to identify severe sagittal CD. Radiographic parameters correlating with health-related quality of life were introduced in a two-step cluster analysis (a combination of hierarchical cluster and k-means cluster) to identify patterns of sagittal deformity. A comparison of lateral and lateral extension radiographs between clusters was performed using an ANOVA in a post hoc analysis. RESULTS:Overall, 75 patients were identified as having severe CD due to sagittal malalignment, and they formed the basis of this study. Their mean age was 64 years, their body mass index was 29 kg/m2, and 66% were female. There were significant correlations between focal alignment/flexibility of maximum kyphosis, cervical lordosis, and thoracic slope minus cervical lordosis (TS-CL) flexibility (r = 0.27, 0.31, and -0.36, respectively). Cluster analysis revealed 3 distinct groups based on alignment and flexibility. Group 1 (a pattern involving a flat neck with lack of compensation) had a large TS-CL mismatch despite flexibility in cervical lordosis; group 2 (a pattern involving focal deformity) had focal kyphosis between 2 adjacent levels but no large regional cervical kyphosis under the setting of a low T1 slope (T1S); and group 3 (a pattern involving a cervicothoracic deformity) had a very large T1S with a compensatory hyperlordosis of the cervical spine. CONCLUSIONS:Three distinct patterns of CD were identified in this cohort: flat neck, focal deformity, and cervicothoracic deformity. One key element to understanding the difference between these groups was the alignment seen on extension radiographs. This information is a first step in developing a classification system that can guide the surgical treatment for CD and the choice of fusion level.

STUDY DESIGN/METHODS:Multicenter database review of consecutive adult spinal deformity (ASD) patients. OBJECTIVE:The aim of this study was to identify associations between changes in spinopelvic parameters and cervical alignment after thoracolumbar arthrodesis for ASD. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA/BACKGROUND:Reciprocal cervical changes occur after instrumented thoracic spinal arthrodesis. The timing and relationship of these changes to sagittal alignment and upper instrumented vertebra (UIV) selection are unknown. METHODS:In 171 ASD patients treated with thoracolumbar arthrodesis from 2008 to 2012, we assessed changes from baseline to 6-week, 1-year, and 2-year follow-up in C2-C7 sagittal vertical axis (SVA), T1 slope, and C2-C7 lordosis. We used multivariate models to analyze associations between these parameters and UIV selection (T9 or distal vs. proximal to T9) and changes at each time point in thoracic kyphosis (TK), lumbar lordosis (LL), C7-S1 SVA, pelvic incidence, pelvic tilt, and sacral slope. RESULTS:Two-year changes in C2-C7 SVA and T1 slope were significantly associated with baseline to 6-week changes in TK and LL and with UIV selection. Baseline to 2-year changes in C2-C7 lordosis were associated with baseline to 6-week changes in C7-S1 SVA (P = 0.004). Most changes in C2-C7 SVA occurred during the first 6 weeks postoperatively (mean 6-week change in C2-C7 SVA: 2.7 cm, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.7-4.7 cm; mean 2-year change in SVA: 2.3 cm, 95% CI: -0.1 to 4.6 cm). At 2 years, on average, there was decrease in C2-C7 lordosis, most of which occurred during the first 6 weeks postoperatively (mean 6-week change: -3.2°, 95% CI: -4.8° to -1.2°; mean 2-year change: -1.3°, 95% CI: - 3.2° to 0.5°). CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:After thoracolumbar arthrodesis, reciprocal changes in cervical alignment are associated with postoperative changes in TK, LL, and C7-S1 SVA and with UIV selection. The largest changes occur during the first 6 weeks and persist during 2-year follow-up. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE/METHODS:3.

It's increasingly common for surgeons to operate on more challenging cases and higher risk patients, resulting in longer op-time and inpatient LOS. Factors predicting extended op-time and LOS for cervical deformity (CD) patients are understudied. This study identified predictors of extended op-time and length of stay (LOS) after CD-corrective surgery. CD patients with baseline (BL) radiographic data were included. Patients were stratified by extended LOS (ELOS; >75th percentile) and normal LOS (N-LOS; <75th percentile). Op-time analysis excluded staged cases, cases >12 h. A Conditional Variable Importance Table used non-replacement sampling set of Conditional Inference trees to identify influential factors. Mean comparison tests compared LOS and op-time for top factors. 142 surgical CD patients (61 yrs, 62%F, 8.2 levels fused). Op-time and LOS were 358 min and 7.2 days; 30% of patients experienced E-LOS (14 ± 13 days). Overlapping predictors of E-LOS and op-time included levels fused (>7 increased LOS 2.7 days; >5 increased op-time 96 min, P < 0.001), approach (anterior reduced LOS 3.0 days; combined increased op-time 69 min, P < 0.01), BMI (>38 kg/m² increased LOS 8.1 days; >39 kg/m² increased op-time 17 min), and osteotomy (LOS 2.0 days, op-time 62 min, P < 0.005). BL cervical parameters increased LOS and op-time: cSVA (>42 mm increased LOS; >50 mm increased op-time, P < 0.030), C0 slope (>@-0.9° increased LOS, >0.3° increased op-time, P < 0.003.) Additional op-time predictors: prior cervical surgery (p = 0.004) and comorbidities (P = 0.015). Other predictors of E-LOS: EBL (P < 0.001), change in mental status (P = 0.001). Baseline cervical malalignment, levels fused, and osteotomy predicted both increased op-time and LOS. These results can be used to better optimize patient care, hospital efficiency, and resource allocation.

STUDY DESIGN:Retrospective review from a single institution. OBJECTIVE:To investigate the effect of hip osteoarthritis (OA) on spinopelvic compensatory mechanisms as a result of reduced hip range of motion (ROM) between sitting and standing. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA:Hip OA results in reduced hip ROM and contracture, causing pain during postural changes. Hip flexion contracture is known to reduce the ability to compensate for spinal deformity while standing; however, the effects of postural spinal alignment change between sitting and standing is not well understood. METHODS:Sit-stand radiographs of patients without prior spinal fusion or hip prosthesis were evaluated. Hip OA was graded by Kellgren-Lawrence grades and divided into low-grade (LOA; grade 0-2) and severe (SOA; grade 3 or 4) groups. Radiographic parameters evaluated were pelvic incidence (PI), pelvic tilt (PT), lumbar lordosis (LL), PI-LL, thoracic kyphosis (TK), SVA, T1-pelvic angle (TPA), T10-L2, proximal femoral shaft angle (PFSA), and hip flexion (PT change-PFSA change). Changes in sit-stand parameters were compared between LOA and SOA groups. RESULTS:548 patients were included (LOA = 311; SOA = 237). After propensity score matching for age, body mass index, and PI, 183 LOA and 183 SOA patients were analyzed. Standing analysis demonstrated that SOA had higher SVA (31.1 vs. 21.7), lower TK (-36.2 vs. -41.1), and larger PFSA (9.1 vs. 7.4) (all p < .05). Sitting analysis demonstrated that SOA had higher PT (29.7 vs. 23.3), higher PI-LL (21.6 vs. 12.4), less LL (31.7 vs. 41.6), less TK (-33.2 vs. -38.6), and greater TPA (27.9 vs. 22.5) (all p < .05). SOA had less hip ROM from standing to sitting versus LOA (71.5 vs. 81.6) (p < .05). Therefore, SOA had more change in PT (15.2 vs. 7.3), PI-LL (20.6 vs. 13.7), LL (-21.4 vs. -13.1), and T10-L2 (-4.9 vs. -1.1) (all p < .001), allowing the femurs to change position despite reduced hip ROM. SOA had greater TPA reduction (15.1 vs. 9.6) and less PFSA change (86.7 vs. 88.8) compared with LOA (both p < .001). CONCLUSIONS:Spinopelvic compensatory mechanisms are adapted for reduced hip joint motion associated with hip OA in standing and sitting. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE:Level III.