Try a new search

Format these results:

Searched for:

person:passip01

in-biosketch:true

Total Results:

797


Development of a modified frailty index for adult spinal deformities independent of functional changes following surgical correction: a true baseline risk assessment tool

Passias, Peter G; Pierce, Katherine E; Mir, Jamshaid M; Krol, Oscar; Lafage, Renaud; Lafage, Virginie; Line, Breton; Uribe, Juan S; Hostin, Richard; Daniels, Alan; Hart, Robert; Burton, Douglas; Shaffrey, Christopher; Schwab, Frank; Diebo, Bassel G; Ames, Christopher P; Smith, Justin S; Schoenfeld, Andrew J; Bess, Shay; Klineberg, Eric O; ,
PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:To develop a simplified, modified frailty index for adult spinal deformity (ASD) patients dependent on objective clinical factors. METHODS:value derived from multivariate forward stepwise regression were including in the modified ASD-FI (clin-ASD-FI). Factors included in the clin-ASD-FI were regressed against mortality, extended length of hospital stay (LOS, > 8 days), revisions, major complications and weights for the clin-ASD-FI were calculated via Beta/Sullivan. Total clin-ASD-FI score was created with a score from 0 to 1. Linear regression correlated clin-ASD-FI with ASD-FI scores and published cutoffs for the ASD-FI were used to create the new frailty cutoffs: not frail (NF: < 0.11), frail (F: 0.11-0.21) and severely frail (SF: > 0.21). Binary logistic regression assessed odds of complication or reop for frail patients. RESULTS:of 0.681, and significant factors were: < 18.5 or > 30 BMI (weight: 0.0625 out of 1), cardiac disease (0.125), disability employment status (0.3125), diabetes mellitus (0.0625), hypertension (0.0625), osteoporosis (0.125), blood clot (0.1875), and bowel incontinence (0.0625). These factors calculated the score from 0 to 1, with a mean cohort score of 0.13 ± 0.14. Breakdown by clin-ASD-FI score: 51.8% NF, 28.1% F, 20.2% SF. Increasing frailty severity was associated with longer LOS (NF: 7.0, F: 8.3, SF: 9.2 days; P < 0.001). Frailty independently predicted occurrence of any complication (OR: 9.357 [2.20-39.76], P = 0.002) and reop (OR: 2.79 [0.662-11.72], P = 0.162). CONCLUSIONS:Utilizing an existing ASD frailty index, we proposed a modified version eliminating the patient-reported components. This index is a true assessment of physiologic status, and represents a superior risk factor assessment compared to other tools for both primary and revision spinal deformity surgery as a result of its immutability with surgery, lack of subjectivity, and ease of use.
PMID: 38305990
ISSN: 2212-1358
CID: 5626942

Patient-Centered Outcomes Following Prone Lateral Single-Position Approach to Same-Day Circumferential Spine Surgery

Passias, Peter G; Williamson, Tyler K; Krol, Oscar; Joujon-Roche, Rachel; Imbo, Bailey; Tretiakov, Peter; Ahmad, Salman; Bennett-Caso, Claudia; Lebovic, Jordan; Owusu-Sarpong, Stephane; Park, Paul; Chou, Dean; Vira, Shaleen; Diebo, Bassel G; Schoenfeld, Andrew J
STUDY DESIGN/METHODS:Retrospective study. OBJECTIVE:Evaluate surgical characteristics and postoperative 2-year results of the PL approach to spinal fusion. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA/BACKGROUND:Prone-lateral(PL) single positioning has recently gained popularity in spine surgery due to lower blood loss and operative time but has yet to be examined for other notable outcomes, including realignment and patient-reported measures. MATERIALS AND METHODS/METHODS:We included circumferential spine fusion patients with a minimum one-year follow-up. Patients were stratified into groups based on undergoing PL approach versus same-day staged (Staged). Mean comparison tests identified differences in baseline parameters. Multivariable logistic regression, controlling for age, levels fused, and Charlson Comorbidity Index were used to determine the influence of the approach on complication rates, radiographic and patient-reported outcomes up to two years. RESULTS:One hundred twenty-two patients were included of which 72(59%) were same-day staged and 50(41%) were PL. PL patients were older with lower body mass index (both P <0.05). Patients undergoing PL procedures had lower estimated blood loss and operative time (both P <0.001), along with fewer osteotomies (63% vs. 91%, P <0.001). This translated to a shorter length of stay (3.8 d vs. 4.9, P =0.041). PL procedures demonstrated better correction in both PT (4.0 vs. -0.2, P =0.033 and pelvic incidence and lumbar lordosis (-3.7 vs. 3.1, P =0.012). PL procedures were more likely to improve in GAP relative pelvic version (OR: 2.3, [1.5-8.8]; P =0.003]. PL patients suffered lesser complications during the perioperative period and greater improvement in NRS-Back (-6.0 vs. -3.3, P =0.031), with less reoperations (0.0% vs. 4.8%, P =0.040) by two years. CONCLUSIONS:Patients undergoing PL single-position procedures received less invasive procedures with better correction of pelvic compensation, as well as earlier discharge. The prone lateral cohort also demonstrated greater clinical improvement and a lower rate of reoperations by two years following spinal corrective surgery. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE/METHODS:Level-III.
PMID: 36972128
ISSN: 1528-1159
CID: 5624232

Revision-Free Loss of Sagittal Correction Greater Than Three Years After Adult Spinal Deformity Surgery: Who and Why?

Lovecchio, Francis; Lafage, Renaud; Kim, Han Jo; Bess, Shay; Ames, Christopher; Gupta, Munish; Passias, Peter; Klineberg, Eric; Mundis, Gregory; Burton, Douglas; Smith, Justin S; Shaffrey, Christopher; Schwab, Frank; Lafage, Virginie; ,
STUDY DESIGN/METHODS:Multicenter retrospective cohort study. OBJECTIVE:To investigate risk factors for loss of correction within the instrumented lumbar spine after adult spinal deformity surgery. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA/BACKGROUND:The sustainability of adult spinal deformity surgery remains a health care challenge. Malalignment is a major reason for revision surgery. PATIENTS AND METHODS/METHODS:A total of 321 patients who underwent fusion of the lumbar spine (≥5 levels, LIV pelvis) with a revision-free follow-up of ≥3 years were identified. Patients were stratified by a change in pelvic incidence-lumbar lordosis from 6 weeks to 3 years postoperative as "maintained" versus "loss" >5°. Those with instrumentation failure (broken rod, screw pullout, etc .) were excluded before comparisons. Demographics, surgical data, and radiographic alignment were compared. Repeated measure analysis of variance was performed to evaluate the maintenance of the correction for L1-L4 and L4-S1. Multivariate logistic regression was conducted to identify independent surgical predictors of correction loss. RESULTS:The cohort had a mean age of 64 years, a mean Body Mass Index of 28 kg/m 2 , and 80% females. Eighty-two patients (25.5%) lost >5° of pelvic incidence-lumbar lordosis correction (mean loss 10±5°). After the exclusion of patients with instrumentation failure, 52 losses were compared with 222 maintained. Demographics, osteotomies, 3CO, interbody fusion, use of bone morphogenetic protein, rod material, rod diameter, and fusion length were not significantly different. L1-S1 screw orientation angle was 1.3 ± 4.1 from early postoperative to 3 years ( P = 0.031), but not appreciably different at L4-S1 (-0.1 ± 2.9 P = 0.97). Lack of a supplemental rod (odds ratio: 4.0, P = 0.005) and fusion length (odds ratio 2.2, P = 0.004) were associated with loss of correction. CONCLUSIONS:Approximately, a quarter of revision-free patients lose an average of 10° of their 6-week correction by 3 years. Lordosis is lost proximally through the instrumentation ( i.e. tulip/shank angle shifts and/or rod bending). The use of supplemental rods and avoiding sagittal overcorrection may help mitigate this loss.
PMID: 37847773
ISSN: 1528-1159
CID: 5624282

Patient-specific Cervical Deformity Corrections With Consideration of Associated Risk: Establishment of Risk Benefit Thresholds for Invasiveness Based on Deformity and Frailty Severity

Passias, Peter G; Pierce, Katherine E; Williamson, Tyler K; Lebovic, Jordan; Schoenfeld, Andrew J; Lafage, Renaud; Lafage, Virginie; Gum, Jeffrey L; Eastlack, Robert; Kim, Han Jo; Klineberg, Eric O; Daniels, Alan H; Protopsaltis, Themistocles S; Mundis, Gregory M; Scheer, Justin K; Park, Paul; Chou, Dean; Line, Breton; Hart, Robert A; Burton, Douglas C; Bess, Shay; Schwab, Frank J; Shaffrey, Christopher I; Smith, Justin S; Ames, Christopher P; ,
STUDY DESIGN/SETTING/METHODS:This was a retrospective cohort study. BACKGROUND:Little is known of the intersection between surgical invasiveness, cervical deformity (CD) severity, and frailty. OBJECTIVE:The aim of this study was to investigate the outcomes of CD surgery by invasiveness, frailty status, and baseline magnitude of deformity. METHODS:This study included CD patients with 1-year follow-up. Patients stratified in high deformity if severe in the following criteria: T1 slope minus cervical lordosis, McGregor's slope, C2-C7, C2-T3, and C2 slope. Frailty scores categorized patients into not frail and frail. Patients are categorized by frailty and deformity (not frail/low deformity; not frail/high deformity; frail/low deformity; frail/high deformity). Logistic regression assessed increasing invasiveness and outcomes [distal junctional failure (DJF), reoperation]. Within frailty/deformity groups, decision tree analysis assessed thresholds for an invasiveness cutoff above which experiencing a reoperation, DJF or not achieving Good Clinical Outcome was more likely. RESULTS:A total of 115 patients were included. Frailty/deformity groups: 27% not frail/low deformity, 27% not frail/high deformity, 23.5% frail/low deformity, and 22.5% frail/high deformity. Logistic regression analysis found increasing invasiveness and occurrence of DJF [odds ratio (OR): 1.03, 95% CI: 1.01-1.05, P =0.002], and invasiveness increased with deformity severity ( P <0.05). Not frail/low deformity patients more often met Optimal Outcome with an invasiveness index <63 (OR: 27.2, 95% CI: 2.7-272.8, P =0.005). An invasiveness index <54 for the frail/low deformity group led to a higher likelihood of meeting the Optimal Outcome (OR: 9.6, 95% CI: 1.5-62.2, P =0.018). For the frail/high deformity group, patients with a score <63 had a higher likelihood of achieving Optimal Outcome (OR: 4.8, 95% CI: 1.1-25.8, P =0.033). There was no significant cutoff of invasiveness for the not frail/high deformity group. CONCLUSIONS:Our study correlated increased invasiveness in CD surgery to the risk of DJF, reoperation, and poor clinical success. The thresholds derived for deformity severity and frailty may enable surgeons to individualize the invasiveness of their procedures during surgical planning to account for the heightened risk of adverse events and minimize unfavorable outcomes.
PMID: 37798829
ISSN: 2380-0194
CID: 5627892

Persistent Lower Extremity Compensation for Sagittal Imbalance After Surgical Correction of Complex Adult Spinal Deformity: A Radiographic Analysis of Early Impact

Williamson, Tyler K; Dave, Pooja; Mir, Jamshaid M; Smith, Justin S; Lafage, Renaud; Line, Breton; Diebo, Bassel G; Daniels, Alan H; Gum, Jeffrey L; Protopsaltis, Themistocles S; Hamilton, D Kojo; Soroceanu, Alex; Scheer, Justin K; Eastlack, Robert; Kelly, Michael P; Nunley, Pierce; Kebaish, Khaled M; Lewis, Stephen; Lenke, Lawrence G; Hostin, Richard A; Gupta, Munish C; Kim, Han Jo; Ames, Christopher P; Hart, Robert A; Burton, Douglas C; Shaffrey, Christopher I; Klineberg, Eric O; Schwab, Frank J; Lafage, Virginie; Chou, Dean; Fu, Kai-Ming; Bess, Shay; Passias, Peter G; ,
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES/OBJECTIVE:Achieving spinopelvic realignment during adult spinal deformity (ASD) surgery does not always produce ideal outcomes. Little is known whether compensation in lower extremities (LEs) plays a role in this disassociation. The objective is to analyze lower extremity compensation after complex ASD surgery, its effect on outcomes, and whether correction can alleviate these mechanisms. METHODS:We included patients with complex ASD with 6-week data. LE parameters were as follows: sacrofemoral angle, knee flexion angle, and ankle flexion angle. Each parameter was ranked, and upper tertile was deemed compensation. Patients compensating and not compensating postoperatively were propensity score matched for body mass index, frailty, and T1 pelvic angle. Linear regression assessed correlation between LE parameters and baseline deformity, demographics, and surgical details. Multivariate analysis controlling for baseline deformity and history of total knee/hip arthroplasty evaluated outcomes. RESULTS:Two hundred and ten patients (age: 61.3 ± 14.1 years, body mass index: 27.4 ± 5.8 kg/m2, Charlson Comorbidity Index: 1.1 ± 1.6, 72% female, 22% previous total joint arthroplasty, 24% osteoporosis, levels fused: 13.1 ± 3.8) were included. At baseline, 59% were compensating in LE: 32% at hips, 39% knees, and 36% ankles. After correction, 61% were compensating at least one joint. Patients undercorrected postoperatively were less likely to relieve LE compensation (odds ratio: 0.2, P = .037). Patients compensating in LE were more often undercorrected in age-adjusted pelvic tilt, pelvic incidence, lumbar lordosis, and T1 pelvic angle and disproportioned in Global Alignment and Proportion (P < .05). Patients matched in sagittal age-adjusted score at 6 weeks but compensating in LE were more likely to develop proximal junctional kyphosis (odds ratio: 4.1, P = .009) and proximal junctional failure (8% vs 0%, P = .035) than those sagittal age-adjusted score-matched and not compensating in LE. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Perioperative lower extremity compensation was a product of undercorrecting complex ASD. Even in age-adjusted realignment, compensation was associated with global undercorrection and junctional failure. Consideration of lower extremities during planning is vital to avoid adverse outcomes in perioperative course after complex ASD surgery.
PMID: 38227826
ISSN: 2332-4260
CID: 5626652

Lumbar Lordosis Redistribution and Segmental Correction in Adult Spinal Deformity (ASD): Does it Matter?

Diebo, Bassel G; Balmaceno-Criss, Mariah; Lafage, Renaud; Daher, Mohammad; Singh, Manjot; Hamilton, D Kojo; Smith, Justin S; Eastlack, Robert K; Fessler, Richard; Gum, Jeffrey L; Gupta, Munish C; Hostin, Richard; Kebaish, Khaled M; Lewis, Stephen; Line, Breton G; Nunley, Pierce D; Mundis, Gregory M; Passias, Peter G; Protopsaltis, Themistocles S; Turner, Jay; Buell, Thomas; Scheer, Justin K; Mullin, Jeffery; Soroceanu, Alex; Ames, Christopher P; Bess, Shay; Shaffrey, Christopher I; Lenke, Lawrence G; Schwab, Frank J; Lafage, Virginie; Burton, Douglas C; Daniels, Alan H; ,
STUDY DESIGN/METHODS:Retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data. OBJECTIVE:Evaluate the impact of correcting to normative segmental lordosis values on post-operative outcomes. BACKGROUND:Restoring lumbar lordosis magnitude is crucial in adult spinal deformity surgery, but the optimal location and segmental distribution remains unclear. METHODS:Patients were grouped based on offset to normative segmental lordosis values, extracted from recent publications. Matched patients were within 10% of the cohort's mean offset, less than or over 10% were under- and over-corrected. Surgical technique, PROMs, and surgical complications were compared across groups at baseline and 2-year. RESULTS:510 patients with an average age of 64.6, mean CCI 2.08, and average follow-up of 25 months. L4-5 was least likely to be matched (19.1%), while L4-S1 was the most likely (24.3%). More patients were overcorrected at proximal levels (T10-L2; Undercorrected, U: 32.2% vs. Matched, M: 21.7% vs. Overcorrected, O: 46.1%) and undercorrected at distal levels (L4-S1: U: 39.0% vs. M: 24.3% vs. O: 36.8%). Postoperative ODI was comparable across correction groups at all spinal levels except at L4-S1 and T10-L2/L4-S1, where overcorrected patients and matched were better than undercorrected (U: 32.1 vs. M: 25.4 vs. O: 26.5, P=0.005; U: 36.2 vs. M: 24.2 vs. O: 26.8, P=0.001; respectively). Patients overcorrected at T10-L2 experienced higher rates of proximal junctional failure (PJF) (U: 16.0% vs. M: 15.6% vs. O: 32.8%, P<0.001) and had greater posterior inclination of the upper instrumented vertebra (UIV) (U: -9.2±9.4° vs. M: -9.6±9.1° vs. O: -12.2±10.0°, P<0.001), whereas undercorrection at these levels led to higher rates of revision for implant failure (U: 14.2% vs. M: 7.3% vs. O: 6.4%, P=0.025). CONCLUSIONS:Patients undergoing fusion for adult spinal deformity suffer higher rates of PJF with overcorrection and increased rates of implant failure with undercorrection based on normative segmental lordosis. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE/METHODS:IV.
PMID: 38270393
ISSN: 1528-1159
CID: 5625212

Factors Influencing Maintenance of Alignment and Functional Improvement Following Adult Spinal Deformity Surgery: A 3-Year Outcome Analysis

Passias, Peter G; Passfall, Lara; Moattari, Kevin; Krol, Oscar; Kummer, Nicholas A; Tretiakov, Peter; Williamson, Tyler; Joujon-Roche, Rachel; Imbo, Bailey; Burhan Janjua, Muhammad; Jankowski, Pawel; Paulino, Carl; Schwab, Frank J; Owusu-Sarpong, Stephane; Singh, Vivek; Ahmad, Salman; Onafowokan, Tobi; Lebovic, Jordan; Tariq, Muhammad; Saleh, Hesham; Vira, Shaleen; Smith, Justin S; Diebo, Bassel; Schoenfeld, Andrew J
STUDY DESIGN/METHODS:Retrospective review. OBJECTIVE:To assess the factors contributing to durability of surgical results following adult spinal deformity surgery. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND/BACKGROUND:Factors contributing to the long-term sustainability of ASD correction are currently undefined. METHODS:Operative ASD patients with preop(BL) and 3-year(3Y) postop radiographic/HRQL data were included. At 1Y and 3Y postop, a favorable outcome was defined as meeting at least 3 of 4 criteria: 1) no PJF or mechanical failure with reoperation, 2) best clinical outcome for SRS[≥4.5] or ODI[<15], 3) improving in at least one SRS-Schwab modifier, and 4) not worsening in any SRS-Schwab modifier. A robust surgical result was defined as having a favorable outcome at both 1Y and 3Y. Predictors of robust outcomes were identified using multivariable regression analysis, with conditional inference tree (CIT) for continuous variables. RESULTS:We included 157 ASD patients in this analysis. At 1Y postop, 62 patients (39.5%) met the best clinical outcome [BCO] definition for ODI and 33 (21.0%) met the BCO for SRS. At 3Y, 58 patients (36.9%) had BCO for ODI and 29 (18.5%) for SRS. 95 patients (60.5%) were identified as having a favorable outcome at 1Y postop. At 3Y, 85 patients (54.1%) had a favorable outcome. Seventy-eight (49.7%) patients met criteria for a durable surgical result. Multivariable adjusted analysis identified the following independent predictors of surgical durability: surgical invasiveness >65, being fused to S1/pelvis, baseline to 6 week PI-LL difference >13.9°, and having a proportional Global Alignment and Proportion (GAP) score at 6 weeks. CONCLUSIONS:Nearly 50% of the ASD cohort demonstrated good surgical durability, with favorable radiographic alignment and functional status maintained up to 3 years. Surgical durability was more likely in patients whose reconstruction was fused to the pelvis and addressed lumbopelvic mismatch with adequate surgical invasiveness to achieve full alignment correction.
PMID: 37199423
ISSN: 1528-1159
CID: 5508072

The Importance of Incorporating Proportional Alignment in Adult Cervical Deformity Corrections Relative to Regional and Global Alignment: Steps Toward Development of a Cervical-Specific Score

Passias, Peter G; Williamson, Tyler K; Pierce, Katherine E; Schoenfeld, Andrew J; Krol, Oscar; Imbo, Bailey; Joujon-Roche, Rachel; Tretiakov, Peter; Ahmad, Salman; Bennett-Caso, Claudia; Mir, Jamshaid; Dave, Pooja; McFarland, Kimberly; Owusu-Sarpong, Stephane; Lebovic, Jordan A; Janjua, Muhammad Burhan; de la Garza-Ramos, Rafael; Vira, Shaleen; Diebo, Bassel; Koller, Heiko; Protopsaltis, Themistocles S; Lafage, Renaud; Lafage, Virginie
STUDY DESIGN/SETTING/METHODS:Retrospective single-center study. BACKGROUND:The global alignment and proportion score is widely used in adult spinal deformity surgery. However, it is not specific to the parameters used in adult cervical deformity (ACD). PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:Create a cervicothoracic alignment and proportion (CAP) score in patients with operative ACD. METHODS:Patients with ACD with 2-year data were included. Parameters consisted of relative McGregor's Slope [RMGS = (MGS × 1.5)/0.9], relative cervical lordosis [RCL = CL - thoracic kyphosis (TK)], Cervical Lordosis Distribution Index (CLDI = C2 - Apex × 100/C2 - T2), relative pelvic version (RPV = sacral slope - pelvic incidence × 0.59 + 9), and a frailty factor (greater than 0.33). Cutoff points were chosen where the cross-tabulation of parameter subgroups reached a maximal rate of meeting the Optimal Outcome. The optimal outcome was defined as meeting Good Clinical Outcome criteria without the occurrence of distal junctional failure (DJF) or reoperation. CAP was scored between 0 and 13 and categorized accordingly: ≤3 (proportioned), 4-6 (moderately disproportioned), >6 (severely disproportioned). Multivariable logistic regression analysis determined the relationship between CAP categories, overall score, and development of distal junctional kyphosis (DJK), DJF, reoperation, and Optimal Outcome by 2 years. RESULTS:One hundred five patients with operative ACD were included. Assessment of the 3-month CAP score found a mean of 5.2/13 possible points. 22.7% of patients were proportioned, 49.5% moderately disproportioned, and 27.8% severely disproportioned. DJK occurred in 34.5% and DJF in 8.7%, 20.0% underwent reoperation, and 55.7% achieved Optimal Outcome. Patients severely disproportioned in CAP had higher odds of DJK [OR: 6.0 (2.1-17.7); P =0.001], DJF [OR: 9.7 (1.8-51.8); P =0.008], reoperation [OR: 3.3 (1.9-10.6); P =0.011], and lower odds of meeting the optimal outcome [OR: 0.3 (0.1-0.7); P =0.007] by 2 years, while proportioned patients suffered zero occurrences of DJK or DJF. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:The regional alignment and proportion score is a method of analyzing the cervical spine relative to global alignment and demonstrates the importance of maintaining horizontal gaze, while also matching overall cervical and thoracolumbar alignment to limit complications and maximize clinical improvement.
PMID: 37796161
ISSN: 1528-1159
CID: 5613142

Efficacy of Varying Surgical Approaches on Achieving Optimal Alignment in Adult Spinal Deformity Surgery

Passias, Peter G; Ahmad, Waleed; Williamson, Tyler K; Lebovic, Jordan; Kebaish, Khaled; Lafage, Renaud; Lafage, Virginie; Line, Breton; Schoenfeld, Andrew J; Diebo, Bassel G; Klineberg, Eric O; Kim, Han Jo; Ames, Christopher P; Daniels, Alan H; Smith, Justin S; Shaffrey, Christopher I; Burton, Douglas C; Hart, Robert A; Bess, Shay; Schwab, Frank J; Gupta, Munish C; ,
BACKGROUND:The Roussouly, SRS-Schwab, and Global Alignment and Proportion (GAP) classifications define alignment by spinal shape and deformity severity. The efficacy of different surgical approaches and techniques to successfully achieve these goals is not well understood. PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:Identify the impact of surgical approach and/or technique on meeting complex realignment goals in adult spinal deformity (ASD) corrective surgery. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING/METHODS:Retrospective study. MATERIALS AND METHODS/METHODS:Included patients with ASD fused to pelvis with 2-year data. Patients were categorized by: (1) Roussouly: matching current and theoretical spinal shapes, (2) improving in SRS-Schwab modifiers (0, +, ++), and (3) improving GAP proportionality by 2 years. Analysis of covariance and multivariable logistic regression analyses controlling for age, levels fused, baseline deformity, and 3-column osteotomy usage compared the effect of different surgical approaches, interbody, and osteotomy use on meeting realignment goals. RESULTS:A total of 693 patients with ASD were included. By surgical approach, 65.7% were posterior-only and 34.3% underwent anterior-posterior approach with 76% receiving an osteotomy (21.8% 3-column osteotomy). By 2 years, 34% matched Roussouly, 58% improved in GAP, 45% in SRS-Schwab pelvic tilt (PT), 62% sagittal vertical axis, and 70% pelvic incidence-lumbar lordosis. Combined approaches were most effective for improvement in PT [odds ratio (OR): 1.7 (1.1-2.5)] and GAP [OR: 2.2 (1.5-3.2)]. Specifically, anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) below L3 demonstrated higher rates of improvement versus TLIFs in Roussouly [OR: 1.7 (1.1-2.5)] and GAP [OR: 1.9 (1.3-2.7)]. Patients undergoing pedicle subtraction osteotomy at L3 or L4 were more likely to improve in PT [OR: 2.0 (1.0-5.2)] and pelvic incidence-lumbar lordosis [OR: 3.8 (1.4-9.8)]. Clinically, patients undergoing the combined approach demonstrated higher rates of meeting SCB in Oswestry Disability Index by 2 years while minimizing rates of proximal junctional failure, most often with an ALIF at L5-S1 [Oswestry Disability Index-SCB: OR: 1.4 (1.1-2.0); proximal junctional failure: OR: 0.4 (0.2-0.8)]. CONCLUSIONS:Among patients undergoing ASD realignment, optimal lumbar shape and proportion can be achieved more often with a combined approach. Although TLIFs, incorporating a 3-column osteotomy, at L3 and L4 can restore lordosis and normalize pelvic compensation, ALIFs at L5-S1 were most likely to achieve complex realignment goals with an added clinical benefit and mitigation of junctional failure.
PMID: 37493057
ISSN: 1528-1159
CID: 5613342

Adult cervical spine deformity: a state-of-the-art review

Jackson-Fowl, Brendan; Hockley, Aaron; Naessig, Sara; Ahmad, Waleed; Pierce, Katherine; Smith, Justin S; Ames, Christopher; Shaffrey, Christopher; Bennett-Caso, Claudia; Williamson, Tyler K; McFarland, Kimberly; Passias, Peter G
Adult cervical deformity is a structural malalignment of the cervical spine that may present with variety of significant symptomatology for patients. There are clear and substantial negative impacts of cervical spine deformity, including the increased burden of pain, limited mobility and functionality, and interference with patients' ability to work and perform everyday tasks. Primary cervical deformities develop as the result of a multitude of different etiologies, changing the normal mechanics and structure of the cervical region. In particular, degeneration of the cervical spine, inflammatory arthritides and neuromuscular changes are significant players in the development of disease. Additionally, cervical deformities, sometimes iatrogenically, may present secondary to malalignment or correction of the thoracic, lumbar or sacropelvic spine. Previously, classification systems were developed to help quantify disease burden and influence management of thoracic and lumbar spine deformities. Following up on these works and based on the relationship between the cervical and distal spine, Ames-ISSG developed a framework for a standardized tool for characterizing and quantifying cervical spine deformities. When surgical intervention is required to correct a cervical deformity, there are advantages and disadvantages to both anterior and posterior approaches. A stepwise approach may minimize the drawbacks of either an anterior or posterior approach alone, and patients should have a surgical plan tailored specifically to their cervical deformity based upon symptomatic and radiographic indications. This state-of-the-art review is based upon a comprehensive overview of literature seeking to highlight the normal cervical spine, etiologies of cervical deformity, current classification systems, and key surgical techniques.
PMID: 37776420
ISSN: 2212-1358
CID: 5631702