Faculty Bibliography

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: ASD is a complex pathology that benefits greatly from surgical treatment despite being associated with high rates of complications. Despite continuous innovation, little is known regarding the association between changes in surgical techniques and complications. PURPOSE: To investigate the evolution of patient profiles and surgical complications across a single prospective multicenter database. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: Retrospective review of prospective data. PATIENT SAMPLE: This study included 947 adult spinal deformity patients surgically treated between 2008 and 2018. OUTCOME MEASURES: Complication types and rates.
METHOD(S): Surgical ASD patients (TK >60degree, SVA >5cm, PT >25degree or Cobb angle >20degree) with minimum 2-year follow-up were included and stratified into 3 equal groups by date of surgery. Demographic, preoperative data, surgical information, and complications were compared across time using a moving average of 316 patients to delineate those enrolled at the beginning of the study (Early) from the most recent one (Late).
RESULT(S): Among the total, 947/1260 (67%) patients completed their 2-year follow-up with an enrollment rate of 7.7+/-4.1 patients per month. Compared to the Early phase (Oct 2008 and Nov 2012), patients enrolled more recently (Jan 2016 to Jan 2018) were older (Age: 56.7+/-15yovs 64.3+/-12.3), sicker (CCI: 1.46+/-1.6 vs 2.08+/-1.78), more disabled (ODI: 42.6+/-19.4 vs 45.7+/-15.3; PCS: 32.8+/-10.4 vs 29.7+/-8.5), with more pronounced sagittal deformity (SRS-Schwab type N: 26.3% vs 50.9%: PI-LL modifier ++: 37.1% vs 46.8%) (all p<0.05). Changes in surgical treatment included an increase use of IBF (61% vs 69.9%), more ACR/3CO use (21% vs 37%) and a decrease in 3CO rate (21% vs 12%), shorter fusion (11.2+/-4 vs 9.8+/-5), more supplemental rods (0.3% vs 26.9%) and BMP use (64.1% vs 80.1%) (all p<0.05), but no significant difference in invasiveness (91.2+/-37.1 vs 86.0+/-36.9 p=0.06). LOS decrease by 1 day, EBL by 500 cc and rate of ICU stay decrease from 71% to 53% (all p <0.001). There was no significant difference in overall complication rate (73% vs 67.4% p=0.14) despite a significant decrease in major complications requiring a reoperation (27.6% vs17.4% p=0.002) driven by a decrease in implant (8.3% vs 4.1% p=0.032) and radiographic failures (12.7% vs 5.7% p=0.002). Rate of major operative complication decreased (11.8% vs 6.7% p=0.028) while rate of major radiographic complication increased (0.6% vs 5.7% p<0.001) leading to a stable rate of major complications without reoperation (28.3% vs 27.9% p=0.92). No significant difference in minor complication rate (38.7% vs 34.2% p=0.24) The moving average analysis revealed a steady decrease in major complications associated to a reoperation (from 28% to 17%). The lowest peak of major complications (21%) occurred between Feb 2014 and Oct 2016, and the lowest overall complication rate (62%) occurred between July 2014 and Feb 2017.
CONCLUSION(S): Despite an increase in patient complexity including older, more medical morbidities and larger deformities, complication rates did not increase and the rate of complications requiring surgery decreased over time. These findings likely reflect evolutions in practice improvement including use of supplemental rods, PJK prophylaxis, BMP use, and targeting age-appropriate deformity corrections. FDA DEVICE/DRUG STATUS: This abstract does not discuss or include any applicable devices or drugs.
Copyright

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Rod failure and pseudarthrosis are common complications following the surgical treatment of adult spinal defomity (ASD). Many strategies have been employed in mitigating these problems, such as interbody fusion, multiple rods, use of more effective biologics, and optimizing spinal alignment. We aimed to study the frequency and type of rod failures in a large ASD population over time. PURPOSE: To study the frequency and type of rod failures in a large ASD population over time. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: Retrospective review of prospective data. PATIENT SAMPLE: This study included 647 adult spinal deformity patients surgically treated between 2008 and 2018. OUTCOME MEASURES: Rod failures.
METHOD(S): ASD patients with a fusion extended from minimum L1 to pelvis and min 2-year follow-up were included. Radiographs and records were examined to identify characteristics of the rod failures: timing, unilateral vs bilateral, vertebral level, unilateral progressing to bilateral failure, revision and failure rates over time.
RESULT(S): Among the study population, 647/1052 patients met inclusion criteria (age: 64+/-10 yrs., 78% F, BMI: 28.3+/-5.7, Mean follow-up: 37 months +/-13). Surgeries for these patients were performed from 2008 to 2018. The UIV was T7 or above in 306 and T8 or below in 338 patients, most frequent UIV: T4 (121) and T10 (208). A total of 146 patients had a 3COs; 435 had interbody fusion with 187 ALIF, 202 TLIF,135 XLIF; 286 patients had BMP use post only and 203 had BMP use interbody and posteriorly. Overall rod failure rate was 135/647 (21%), of which 9.3% occurred before by 2 years postop. Mean days to failure was 795 day +/- 485 (Median 733). Most frequent failures were in the lower lumbar spine L3-4 (32) 24%, L4-5 (34) 25% and L5-S1 (44) 32%. Of the 97 Unilateral failures, 35 (36.1%) were revised and only 8 progressed to bilateral failure of which 6/8 were revised; 46 Bilateral failure, 24 (52.2%) were revised.Kaplan-Meier analysis shows a survival rate of 89.7% at 2 years with decrease of 5% per year. No significant difference was found between the first 5 years and last 5 years. Comparison of primary vs revision index procedures did not reveal any differences in time to failure nor time to revision. Use of BMP improved survival rate to 91.2% compared to no BMP 83.4% at 2 years.
CONCLUSION(S): Rod failures remain a common complication when treating ASD with a rate of 21%. Among those rod failures, 9.3% occurred within 2 years. The most frequent sites of failure were in the lower lumbar spine. Unilateral failures underwent a lower rate of revision than bilateral. BMP increased rod survivability. Kaplan-Meier analysis demonstrated a survival rate of 89.7% at 2 years with a decrease of 5% per year. The failure rate has not improved when comparing the first 5 years. to last 5 years. We must continue to seek solutions to improve rod durability challenges to improve long-term outcomes. FDA DEVICE/DRUG STATUS: This abstract does not discuss or include any applicable devices or drugs.
Copyright

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Cervical deformity (CD) surgery can markedly improve patient quality of life. The longevity of CD correction and the mechanism of alignment deterioration are not well understood. PURPOSE: To investigate preoperative risk factors and failure mechanisms that erode CD corrections and the impact on functional outcomes. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: Retrospective review of a prospective CD database. PATIENT SAMPLE: This study included 155 operative CD patients with baseline (BL) and 1-year follow-up. OUTCOME MEASURES: Alignment at baseline, 3 months, 6 months and 1 year: cervical sagittal vertical axis (cSVA), C2 Slope (C2S), T1 slope (T1S), C2-C7 lordosis (CL), T1S-CL mismatch (TS-CL), Neck Disability Index (NDI), Modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association score (mJOA).
Method(s): A retrospective review of a prospective database of operative CD patients was analyzed. Patients with baseline, 3-month, 6-month and 1-year cervical radiographs were included. Cervical sagittal vertical axis (cSVA) <4cm was used to categorize patients as well-aligned vs malaligned. Additionally, three subsets were defined as follows: (1) patients who were malaligned preoperatively (cSVA>=4) and remained well aligned at 1 year postoperatively; (2) patients who were well-aligned but experienced alignment deterioration (cSVA>=4cm) up to 1 year postop, and; (3) patients who never attained cSVA <4cm. These groups were compared in terms of demographic factors, surgical factors, baseline radiographic parameters and radiographic and surgical outcomes at baseline and 1 year, using t-tests and X2 tests for continuous and categorical variables, respectively.
Result(s): A total of 155 patients were included (mean age 61.41, 60.9% F). The entire cohort was analyzed at all time points for alignment using cSVA. Among 89 patients with X-rays at every time point, 30 patients (34%) maintained their good alignment correction at 1-year postop. Seventeen patients (19%) experienced alignment deterioration and 42 patients (46%) never reached cSVA <4cm at any time point. Four patients lost their correction at 3 months, 6 patients at 6 months and 8 patients were malaligned by 1 year. The never-aligned cohort was significantly older when compared to those who maintained alignment or those who deteriorated (65.9 vs 61.8 vs 58.8, p=0.038). Patients who never achieved good alignment and those who suffered deterioration had a significantly higher rate of DJK (42.9% vs 47.1% vs 3.3%, p=0.001). Other failure mechanisms in the deterioration group included loss of subjacent spinopelvic compensation and PJK. At baseline, patients with alignment deterioration had a smaller cSVA compared to those who maintained or never reached good alignment (40.5 vs 52.0 and 60.1mm, p=0.001), and less TK (-43.4 vs -55.9 vs -61.4, p=0.049). At 1-year postop, patients with deterioration had worsening of their mJOA score at 6 months compared to those who maintained or never reached proper alignment (2.50 vs 0.04 vs 1.20, p=0.032). There were no significant differences in smokers, BMI, frailty, osteoporosis, levels fused, UIV, LIV, EBL, operative time, rod diameter, rod material, utilization 3-column osteotomy, mean osteotomy grade, in construct (fused) loss of alignment or revision rate between the groups (all p>.05)
Conclusion(s): Cervical deformity correction surgery failed to achieve acceptable sagittal alignment in 46% of patients. In those with successful correction, 36% suffered alignment deterioration within 1 year. Distal junctional kyphosis was the most common failure mechanism leading to loss of correction. FDA DEVICE/DRUG STATUS: This abstract does not discuss or include any applicable devices or drugs.
Copyright

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Adult spinal deformity (ASD) patients experience markedly decreased health-related quality of life along many dimensions. PURPOSE: We hypothesized that ASD surgery would be associated with improved work- and school-related productivity, as well as decreased rates of absenteeism. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: Retrospective cohort study. PATIENT SAMPLE: Only patients eligible for 2-year follow-up were included, and those with a history of previous spinal fusion were excluded. OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome measures in this study were SRS-22r questions 9 ("What is your current level of work/school activity?") and 17 ("In the last 3 months have you taken any days off of work, including household work, or school because of back pain?").
METHOD(S): A repeated measures mixed linear regression was used to analyze responses over time among patients managed operatively (OP) vs nonoperatively (NON-OP). Results were further stratified by baseline employment status, age, SVA, PI-LL, and deformity curve type.
RESULT(S): In total, 1,188 patients were analyzed. Of those, 66.6% (n=792) were managed operatively. The vast majority (78.9%, n=934) were female. Patients were relatively evenly distributed across age groups (27.6% 0-49; 21.1% 50-59; 30.1% 60-69; 21.2% >=70). At baseline, the mean percentage of activity at work/school was 56.4% (SD 35.4%), and the mean days off from work/school over the past 90 days was 1.6 (SD 1.8). Patients undergoing ASD surgery exhibited an 18.1% absolute increase in work/school productivity at 2-year follow-up vs baseline (p<0.0001), while no significant change was observed for the nonoperative cohort (p>0.5). Similarly, the OP cohort experienced 1.1 fewer absent days over the past 90 days at 2 years vs baseline (p<0.0001), while the NON-OP cohort showed no such difference (p>0.3). These differences were largely preserved after stratifying by baseline employment status, age group, SVA, PI-LL, and deformity curve type.
CONCLUSION(S): ASD patients managed operatively exhibited an average increase in work/school productivity of 18.1% and decreased absenteeism of 1.1 per 90 days at 2-year follow-up, while patients managed non-operatively did not exhibit change from baseline. Given the age distribution of patients in this study, these findings should be interpreted as pertaining primarily to obligations at work or within the home. Further study of the direct and indirect economic benefits of ASD surgery to patients is warranted. FDA DEVICE/DRUG STATUS: This abstract does not discuss or include any applicable devices or drugs.
Copyright

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Few guidelines exist regarding appropriate upper instrumented vertebra (UIV) selection for adult spinal deformity (ASD) patients undergoing long fusion to the pelvis. Fusion to upper thoracic (UT) spine may provide greater deformity correction and reduce proximal junctional failure (PJF) rates compared to fusions terminating at the thoracolumbar (TL) spine. Previous reports comparing outcomes for UT vs TL UIV for ASD surgery are confounded by discrepant patient cohorts. PSM analyses can be used to reduce selection bias and mimic patient randomization. PURPOSE: Use a propensity score matched (PSM) analysis to compare surgical and hospital data, deformity correction, complication rates, and patient reported outcomes (PROs) for demographically and radiographically matched ASD patients receiving TL vs UT UIV. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: PSM analysis of ASD patients prospectively enrolled into a multicenter study. PATIENT SAMPLE: Surgically treated ASD patients. OUTCOME MEASURES: Numeric rating scale (NRS) back and leg pain, Scoliosis Research Society-22r questionnaire (SRS-22r), Short Form-36v2 questionnaire (SF-36), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), estimated blood loss, duration of hospital stay, postoperative complications, revision spine surgery, PJF.
Method(s): ASD patients prospectively enrolled into a multicenter study from 2009-2018 were classified according to SRS-Schwab ASD Types. Study inclusion; 1) surgery for lumbar (L), sagittal (S) or mixed (M) deformities, 2) fusion to pelvis, 3) >=5 levels fused, 4) >=2 year follow up. Study exclusion; double major or thoracic scoliosis, thoracic hyperkyphosis (>70degree). UIV cohorts formed based on bimodal UIV distribution (TL=L2-T8 vs UT=T6-T1). PSM matched TL and UT for preop demographics, scoliosis, PI-LL, TK, SVA, TPA and osteotomies. Postop deformity correction, complications, and PROs were compared for UT vs TL in L, M, S deformities.
Result(s): Of 699 eligible patients, 417 (L [n=70], S [n=166] and M [n=198]) were evaluated. UT and TL had similar preop age, frailty, spine deformity, follow up, osteotomies performed (p>0.05). UT had greater blood loss in L and M deformities, greater SICU admissions for L and S, longer hospital and greater revision surgery for implant failures for all deformities than TL (p<0.05). UT had fewer PJF for L deformities (p<0.05). Deformity correction and PROM improvement was similar UT vs TL for all cohorts at last follow up (p>0.05).
Conclusion(s): The theoretical benefits of UT fusion were not demonstrated for matched L, S and M patients receiving long fusion to the pelvis. UT had greater blood loss, hospital stay and revision surgery for implant failures than TL. For select deformities surgeons should consider TL UIV rather than UT; however, more research is needed to determine best outcomes for fusion levels for ASD. FDA DEVICE/DRUG STATUS: This abstract does not discuss or include any applicable devices or drugs.
Copyright

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: A previous study by Pellise et al identified that a lowest instrumented vertebrae (LIV) at the pelvis, frailty, and sagittal deformity (global sagittal alignment [SVA], lordosis gap [PI-LL], T1 sagittal tilt [T1Slope]) were strong preoperative predictors of major complications. In addition to the preoperative predictors, blood loss and surgical time were strong predictors that occur operatively. It is unknown whether being at risk by these criteria has an effect on cost of surgery. PURPOSE: To determine whether previously established risk stratification criteria will reduce operative costs. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: Retrospective cohort study of a prospectively collected multicenter ASD database. PATIENT SAMPLE: This study included 952 ASD patients. OUTCOME MEASURES: Health-related quality of life measures (HRQLs), quality adjusted life years (QALYs), utility gained, ODI, total cost.
METHOD(S): Adult spinal deformity (ASD) patients with complete baseline (BL) and 2-year (2Y) HRQLs and radiographic data were included. Frailty score, sagittal deformity measures, blood loss, and surgical time were divided into tertiles, with the highest tertile being high risk. Published methods converted ODI to SF-6D. QALYs utilized a 3% discount rate for residual decline to life expectancy (LE, 78.7 years). Cost was calculated using the PearlDiver database and assessed for complications/major complications and comorbidities according to CMS.gov definitions. Cost per QALY at 2Y and LE were calculated for additive risk factors (LIV at pelvis, high frailty, any high sagittal deformity measure, high blood loss, high surgical time). These costs represented national averages of Medicare pay-scales for services within a 30-day window including length of stay and death differentiated by complication/comorbidity, revision, and surgical approach. Internal cost data were based on individual patient DRG codes.
RESULT(S): Of 926 patients included, 118 did not meet any risk criteria, 171 met 1, 207 met 2, 151 met 3, 56 met 4, and 3 met 5 (these 3 patients were excluded due to small sample size). There was a significant trend (R2=0.897) in terms of national average cost at 2-years with increasing amount of risk measures met, as cost increased by $11,566 with each additional risk factor. Amount of risk factors met had a positive correlation to baseline ODI (0: 30.89; 1: 39.66; 2: 46.96; 3: 51.59; 4: 54.69; p<0.001) and 2Y ODI (0: 18.06; 1: 22.55; 2: 27.53; 3: 34.23; 4: 38.54; p<0.001). When analyzing initial surgical cost by DRG code, there was a $3,844 increase in cost per risk factor (R2=0.8703). Patients meeting 2 risk factors had the highest ODI improvement from BL to 2Y (p=0.06). QALYs gained at LE decreased by 0.0756 per risk factor (R2=0.8153). National average cost per QALY at 2Y increased by $45,852 per risk factor (R2=0.4151), and cost per QALY at LE increased by $15,759 per risk factor (R2=0.8822).
CONCLUSION(S): Increasing risk factors involving frailty, baseline deformity, and operative factors reduce cost effectiveness by increasing total cost and reducing QALYs. Preoperative or intraoperative measures to reduce a patient's amount of applicable risk factors would concurrently reduce operative cost and improve cost-effectiveness. Awareness of non-modifiable risk factors may also help educate surgical approach. FDA DEVICE/DRUG STATUS: This abstract does not discuss or include any applicable devices or drugs.
Copyright

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Both frailty and surgical invasiveness are correlated with increased risk of complications following ASD surgery, yet there is no accepted risk-stratification system combining these factors. PURPOSE: The aim of this study is to ascertain data-driven categories defining the risk for 90-day complications following ASD surgery based on frailty and surgical invasiveness. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: Retrospective review of a multicenter database. PATIENT SAMPLE: A total of 1,272 surgical ASD patients undergoing spinal fusions >=5 levels OUTCOME MEASURES: Ninety-day complication risk, 90-day complication rate, invasiveness thresholds for increased complications.
METHOD(S): Using a prospective, multicenter database, we identified 1,272 surgical ASD patients undergoing posterior spinal fusion of at least five levels. Patients were separated into three frailty groups based on the ASD-FI frailty index. Within each frailty group, stratum-specific likelihood ratio (SSLR) analyses were performed to define frailty-based surgical invasiveness cutoffs associated with increased risk for 90-day complications. Cutoffs generated through SSLR were confirmed with multivariable logistic regression analysis controlling for age, alignment, and ODI.
RESULT(S): Mean age was 60 +/- 14 years, 74% females. Of 1,272 surgical ASD patients, 319 (35%) were nonfrail (NF), 667 (52%) frail (F), and 286 (23%) severely frail (SF). Mean SI was 93 +/- 35. The mean complication rate was 35.4% for NF, 37% for F and 43.6% for SF. SSLR analysis of NF patients produced 2 complication categories: 33% complication rate for SI < 153 and 73% for SI >= 153. NF patients with SI >= 153 had 4.14x higher odds of complications than NF patients with SI <153 (p=0.04). SSLR analysis of F patients produced 3 complication categories: 26% complication rate for SI < 60, 42% for SI of 60 to 179, and 64% for SI >= 180. Relative to F patients with SI < 60, F patients with SI 60 to 179, and SI >= 180 had 2.4x and 6.7x higher odds of complications, respectively (p<0.01 for both). SSLR analysis of SF patients produced 2 complication categories: 35% complication rate for SI < 82 and 49% complication rate for SI >= 82. SF patients with SI >= 82 had 1.77x higher odds of complications than SF patients with SI < 82 (p=0.04).
CONCLUSION(S): Frailer groups were found to have lower SI cutoffs, indicating the less invasiveness surgeries can be performed on frail patients to minimize complication risk. This risk-stratification system is useful for counselling patients regarding their risk of complication. FDA DEVICE/DRUG STATUS: This abstract does not discuss or include any applicable devices or drugs.
Copyright

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: In asymptomatic individuals, two-thirds of the lordosis comes from the L4-S1 level. It is commonly believed that the majority of loss of lordosis in adult spinal deformity (ASD) is attributable to the distal (L4-S1) levels. PURPOSE: This study aims to investigate the location of loss of lordosis in a cohort of ASD patients prior to surgical intervention. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: Retrospective review of prospective databases. PATIENT SAMPLE: This study included 119 symptomatic adult volunteer and 357 adult spinal deformity patients. OUTCOME MEASURES: Regional and focal alignment. Lordosis distribution.
METHOD(S): A registry of asymptomatic volunteers was used to build age and pelvic incidence (PI) adjusted normative models of PI-LL, L1-L4 lordosis, L4-S1 lordosis, TL kyphosis (T10-L2), and thoracic kyphosis (T1-T12). Our study cohort was a registry of surgical primary ASD patients without coronal malalignment (SRS-Schwab Type=N). The formulas developed in the asymptomatic population were applied to the ASD group to calculate normative values for each patient. The ASD population was divided into four groups based on quartiles of PI-LL: no, mild, moderate, and severe PI-LL mismatch. Within each group, paired t-tests were performed to compare actual and calculated normative sagittal alignment; actual alignment was also expressed in percentage of normative values. The level of significance was p<0.05.
RESULT(S): The asymptomatic cohort used included 119 asymptomatic volunteers (50.7yo+/-17, PI: 52degree+/-11.4) with the following regional alignment: L4-S1=34degree, L1-L4=23degree, TKL=3degree, and TK=49degree. The study cohort included 357 ASD patients (64.6yo, 58.5%F). The PI-LL of the 4 quartiles were -10degree, 10degree, 20degree, and 40degree. There were no significant differences in PI or in any of the coronal Cobb angles. Comparing each ASD group to the calculated normative values; the "no mismatch" group had a greater L4-S1 (+8degree), a greater T10-L2 kyphosis (+14degree) and T1-T12 kyphosis (+8degree), but no difference in L1-L4. The "mild mismatch" group had a smaller L1-L4 (-12degree), greater TLK (+5degree), smaller TK (-7degree) and no difference in L4-S1. The "moderate mismatch" had a smaller L4-S1 (-7degree), L1-L4 (-15degree), TK (-15degree) but no difference in TLK. Finally, the "severe mismatch" group had a smaller L4-S1 (-15degree), L1-L4 (-26degree), and TK (-27degree) but no difference in TKL (all with p<0.001). The analysis by percentage of actual alignment vs the calculated age and PI matched normative values permitted to identify the driver(s) of the sagittal malalignment. The "no mismatch" had an excess of TLK (+510%) compensated by an excess in L4-S1 (+27%). The "mild mismatch" had a loss of L1-L4 (-48%) with a normal L4-S1, while the "moderate mismatch" had mainly a deficit in L1-L4 (-66%) associated to a 22% loss on L4-S1. Finally, "severe-mismatch" presented a kyphotic L1-L4 (-115% vs norm) with a 46% deficit in L4-S1
CONCLUSION(S): In this cohort of ASD patients with limited coronal deformity, the majority of the loss of lordosis is attributable to the proximal segment. As the deformity worsened, the loss of lordosis also involved the distal lumbar segments. FDA DEVICE/DRUG STATUS: This abstract does not discuss or include any applicable devices or drugs.
Copyright

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Few studies investigate fractional curve correction after long fusion with transforaminal (TLIF) vs anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) for adult symptomatic thoracolumbar/lumbar scoliosis (ASLS). PURPOSE: Our objective was to compare fractional correction, health-related quality-of-life (HRQL), and complications associated with L4-S1 TLIF vs ALIF in ASLS operative treatment. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: Retrospective review of a prospectively collected multicenter consecutive case registry. PATIENT SAMPLE: Database enrollment required age >=18 years, scoliosis >=20, sagittal vertical axis (SVA) >=5cm, pelvic tilt >=25, or thoracic kyphosis >=60. OUTCOME MEASURES: Radiographic correction (including L4-S1 fractional curve), HRQL (Oswestry Disability Index [ODI], Short Form-36 [SF-36] scores, Scoliosis Research Society-22 [SRS-22r] scores), and complications.
METHOD(S): Prospective multicenter data was reviewed. Study inclusion required fractional curve >=10degree, thoracolumbar/lumbar curve >=30degree, index TLIF vs ALIF at L4-L5 and/or L5-S1, and minimum 2-year follow-up. TLIF and ALIF patients were propensity-matched using number and type of interbody fusion at L4-S1.
RESULT(S): Of 135 potentially eligible consecutive patients, 106 (78.5%) achieved minimum 2-year follow-up (age=60.6+/-9.3years, women=85.8%, TLIF=44.3%, ALIF=55.7%). Index operations had 12.2+/-3.6 posterior levels, iliac fixation=86.8%, and TLIF/ALIF at L4-L5 (67.0%) and L5-S1 (84.0%). ALIF had greater cage height (10.9+/-2.1 vs 14.5+/-3.0mm, p=0.001) and lordosis (6.3degree+/-1.6degree vs 17.0degree+/-9.9degree, p=0.001) and longer operative duration (6.7+/-1.5 vs 8.9+/-2.5hrs, p<0.001). Final alignment improved significantly (p<0.05): fractional curve (20.2degree+/-7.0degree to 6.9degree+/-5.2degree), maximum coronal Cobb (55.0degree+/-14.8degree to 23.9degree+/-14.3degree), C7-sagittal vertical axis (5.1+/-6.2 to 2.3+/-5.4cm), pelvic tilt (24.6degree+/-8.1degree to 22.7degree+/-9.5degree), and lumbar lordosis (32.3degree+/-18.8degree to 51.4degree+/-14.1degree). Matched analysis demonstrated comparable fractional correction (TLIF=-13.6degree+/-6.7degree vs ALIF=-13.6degree+/-8.1degree, p=0.982). Final HRQL improved significantly (p<0.05): ODI (42.4+/-16.3 to 24.2+/-19.9), SF-36 Physical Component Summary (PCS, 32.6+/-9.3 to 41.3+/-11.7), SRS-22r (2.9+/-0.6 to 3.7+/-0.7). Matched analysis demonstrated worse ODI (30.9+/-21.1 vs 17.9+/-17.1, p=0.017) and PCS (38.3+/-12.0 vs 45.3+/-10.1, p=0.020) for TLIF at last follow-up (despite no difference in these parameters at baseline). Total complication rate per patient was not different (TLIF=76.6% vs ALIF=71.2%, p=0.530), but significantly more TLIF patients had rod fractures (RF) (TLIF=28.6% vs ALIF=7.1%, p=0.036). Multiple regression demonstrated 1-mm increase in L4-L5 TLIF cage height lead to 2.2degree reduction in L4 coronal tilt (p=0.011), and 1degree increase in L5-S1 ALIF cage lordosis lead to 0.4degree increase in L5-S1 segmental lordosis (p=0.045).
CONCLUSION(S): Operative ASLS treatment with L4-S1 TLIF vs ALIF demonstrated comparable fractional curve correction (66.7% vs 64.8%) despite significantly larger, more lordotic ALIF cages. TLIF cage height had significant impact on leveling L4 coronal tilt, whereas ALIF cage lordosis had significant impact on lumbosacral lordosis restoration. Advantages of TLIF may include reduced operative duration; however, associated HRQL was inferior and more RFs were detected in this study. FDA DEVICE/DRUG STATUS: This abstract does not discuss or include any applicable devices or drugs.
Copyright

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Few studies investigate segmental lordosis restoration after long fusion with anterior (ALIF) vs transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) for adults with flatback deformity. PURPOSE: Our objective was to compare segmental lordosis restoration, health-related quality-of-life (HRQL), and complications associated with L4-S1 ALIF vs TLIF in operative treatment of flatback deformity. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: Retrospective review of a prospectively collected multicenter consecutive case registry. PATIENT SAMPLE: Database enrollment required age >=18 years, scoliosis >=20degree, sagittal vertical axis (SVA) >=5cm, pelvic tilt >=25degree, or thoracic kyphosis >=60degree. OUTCOME MEASURES: Radiographic correction (including L4-S1 segmental lordosis), HRQL (Oswestry Disability Index [ODI], Short Form-36 [SF-36] scores, Scoliosis Research Society-22 [SRS-22r] scores), and complications.
Method(s): Prospective multicenter data were reviewed. Study inclusion required pelvic incidence to lumbar lordosis mismatch >=10degree (flatback), index ALIF vs TLIF at L4-L5 and/or L5-S1, and minimum 2-year follow-up. Cage details (height and lordosis) were also assessed.
Result(s): Of 222 consecutive patients, 157 (71%) achieved 2-year follow-up (age=63+/-10years, women=82%, ALIF=43%, TLIF=57%). Index operations had 12+/-3 posterior levels, iliac fixation=93%, and ALIF/TLIF at L4-L5 (66%) and L5-S1 (85%). ALIF vs TLIF cages were similar in height, but cage lordosis was greater for ALIF: L4-L5 (9degree+/-5degree vs 7degree+/-2degree, p=0.025) and L5-S1 (14degree+/-9degree vs 7degree+/-3degree, p<0.001). ALIF (vs TLIF) was associated with significantly more L4-S1 segmental lordosis at last follow-up (37degree+/-11degree vs 31degree+/-9degree, p<0.001) despite similar baseline measurement (32degree+/-15degree vs 31degree+/-14degree, p=0.705). Multiple regression demonstrated 1degree increase in L4-L5 ALIF cage lordosis led to 0.9degree increase in L4-L5 segmental lordosis (p=0.014), and 1degree increase in L5-S1 ALIF cage lordosis led to 0.5degree increase in L5-S1 segmental lordosis (p=0.005). For all patients, final alignment improved significantly (p<0.05): T12-S1 lordosis (25degree+/-17degree to 48degree+/-13degree), L4-S1 lordosis (32degree+/-14degree to 34degree+/-10degree),