Browse

You are looking at 1 - 10 of 11 items for

  • By Author: Eastlack, Robert x
Clear All
Free access

The comprehensive anatomical spinal osteotomy and anterior column realignment classification

Presented at the 2018 AANS/CNS Joint Section on Disorders of the Spine and Peripheral Nerves

Juan S. Uribe, Frank Schwab, Gregory M. Mundis Jr., David S. Xu, Jacob Januszewski, Adam S. Kanter, David O. Okonkwo, Serena S. Hu, Deviren Vedat, Robert Eastlack, Pedro Berjano and Praveen V. Mummaneni

OBJECTIVE

Spinal osteotomies and anterior column realignment (ACR) are procedures that allow preservation or restoration of spine lordosis. Variations of these techniques enable different degrees of segmental, regional, and global sagittal realignment. The authors propose a comprehensive anatomical classification system for ACR and its variants based on the level of technical complexity and invasiveness. This serves as a common language and platform to standardize clinical and radiographic outcomes for the utilization of ACR.

METHODS

The proposed classification is based on 6 anatomical grades of ACR, including anterior longitudinal ligament (ALL) release, with varying degrees of posterior column release or osteotomies. Additionally, a surgical approach (anterior, lateral, or posterior) was added. Reliability of the classification was evaluated by an analysis of 16 clinical cases, rated twice by 14 different spine surgeons, and calculation of Fleiss kappa coefficients.

RESULTS

The 6 grades of ACR are as follows: grade A, ALL release with hyperlordotic cage, intact posterior elements; grade 1 (ACR + Schwab grade 1), additional resection of the inferior facet and joint capsule; grade 2 (ACR + Schwab grade 2), additional resection of both superior and inferior facets, interspinous ligament, ligamentum flavum, lamina, and spinous process; grade 3 (ACR + Schwab grade 3), additional adjacent-level 3-column osteotomy including pedicle subtraction osteotomy; grade 4 (ACR + Schwab grade 4), 2-level distal 3-column osteotomy including pedicle subtraction osteotomy and disc space resection; and grade 5 (ACR + Schwab grade 5), complete or partial removal of a vertebral body and both adjacent discs with or without posterior element resection. Intraobserver and interobserver reliability were 97% and 98%, respectively, across the 14-reviewer cohort.

CONCLUSIONS

The proposed anatomical realignment classification provides a consistent description of the various posterior and anterior column release/osteotomies. This reliability study confirmed that the classification is consistent and reproducible across a diverse group of spine surgeons.

Restricted access

Paul Park, Kai-Ming Fu, Praveen V. Mummaneni, Juan S. Uribe, Michael Y. Wang, Stacie Tran, Adam S. Kanter, Pierce D. Nunley, David O. Okonkwo, Christopher I. Shaffrey, Gregory M. Mundis Jr., Dean Chou, Robert Eastlack, Neel Anand, Khoi D. Than, Joseph M. Zavatsky, Richard G. Fessler and the International Spine Study Group

OBJECTIVE

Achieving appropriate spinopelvic alignment in deformity surgery has been correlated with improvement in pain and disability. Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) techniques have been used to treat adult spinal deformity (ASD); however, there is concern for inadequate sagittal plane correction. Because age can influence the degree of sagittal correction required, the purpose of this study was to analyze whether obtaining optimal spinopelvic alignment is required in the elderly to obtain clinical improvement.

METHODS

A multicenter database of ASD patients was queried. Inclusion criteria were age ≥ 18 years; an MIS component as part of the index procedure; at least one of the following: pelvic tilt (PT) > 20°, sagittal vertical axis (SVA) > 50 mm, pelvic incidence to lumbar lordosis (PI-LL) mismatch > 10°, or coronal curve > 20°; and minimum follow-up of 2 years. Patients were stratified into younger (< 65 years) and older (≥ 65 years) cohorts. Within each cohort, patients were categorized into aligned (AL) or mal-aligned (MAL) subgroups based on postoperative radiographic measurements. Mal-alignment was defined as a PI-LL > 10° or SVA > 50 mm. Pre- and postoperative radiographic and clinical outcomes were compared.

RESULTS

Of the 185 patients, 107 were in the younger cohort and 78 in the older cohort. Based on postoperative radiographs, 36 (33.6%) of the younger patients were in the AL subgroup and 71 (66.4%) were in the MAL subgroup. The older patients were divided into 2 subgroups based on alignment; there were 26 (33.3%) patients in the AL and 52 (66.7%) in the MAL subgroups. Overall, patients within both younger and older cohorts significantly improved with regard to postoperative visual analog scale (VAS) scores for back and leg pain and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores. In the younger cohort, there were no significant differences in postoperative VAS back and leg pain scores between the AL and MAL subgroups. However, the postoperative ODI score of 37.9 in the MAL subgroup was significantly worse than the ODI score of 28.5 in the AL subgroup (p = 0.019). In the older cohort, there were no significant differences in postoperative VAS back and leg pain score or ODI between the AL and MAL subgroups.

CONCLUSIONS

MIS techniques did not achieve optimal spinopelvic alignment in most cases. However, age appears to impact the degree of sagittal correction required. In older patients, optimal spinopelvic alignment thresholds did not need to be achieved to obtain similar symptomatic improvement. Conversely, in younger patients stricter adherence to optimal spinopelvic alignment thresholds may be needed.

https://thejns.org/doi/abs/10.3171/2018.4.SPINE171153

Free access

Gregory W. Poorman, Peter G. Passias, Samantha R. Horn, Nicholas J. Frangella, Alan H. Daniels, D. Kojo Hamilton, Hanjo Kim, Daniel Sciubba, Bassel G. Diebo, Cole A. Bortz, Frank A. Segreto, Michael P. Kelly, Justin S. Smith, Brian J. Neuman, Christopher I. Shaffrey, Virginie LaFage, Renaud LaFage, Christopher P. Ames, Robert Hart, Gregory M. Mundis Jr. and Robert Eastlack

OBJECTIVE

Depression and anxiety have been demonstrated to have negative impacts on outcomes after spine surgery. In patients with cervical deformity (CD), the psychological and physiological burdens of the disease may overlap without clear boundaries. While surgery has a proven record of bringing about significant pain relief and decreased disability, the impact of depression and anxiety on recovery from cervical deformity corrective surgery has not been previously reported on in the literature. The purpose of the present study was to determine the effect of depression and anxiety on patients’ recovery from and improvement after CD surgery.

METHODS

The authors conducted a retrospective review of a prospective, multicenter CD database. Patients with a history of clinical depression, in addition to those with current self-reported anxiety or depression, were defined as depressed (D group). The D group was compared with nondepressed patients (ND group) with a similar baseline deformity determined by propensity score matching of the cervical sagittal vertical axis (cSVA). Baseline demographic, comorbidity, clinical, and radiographic data were compared among patients using t-tests. Improvement of symptoms was recorded at 3 months, 6 months, and 1 year postoperatively. All health-related quality of life (HRQOL) scores collected at these follow-up time points were compared using t-tests.

RESULTS

Sixty-six patients were matched for baseline radiographic parameters: 33 with a history of depression and/or current depression, and 33 without. Depressed patients had similar age, sex, race, and radiographic alignment: cSVA, T-1 slope minus C2–7 lordosis, SVA, and T-1 pelvic angle (p > 0.05). Compared with nondepressed individuals, depressed patients had a higher incidence of osteoporosis (21.2% vs 3.2%, p = 0.028), rheumatoid arthritis (18.2% vs 3.2%, p = 0.012), and connective tissue disorders (18.2% vs 3.2%, p = 0.012). At baseline, the D group had greater neck pain (7.9 of 10 vs 6.6 on a Numeric Rating Scale [NRS], p = 0.015), lower mean EQ-5D scores (68.9 vs 74.7, p < 0.001), but similar Neck Disability Index (NDI) scores (57.5 vs 49.9, p = 0.063) and myelopathy scores (13.4 vs 13.9, p = 0.546). Surgeries performed in either group were similar in terms of number of levels fused, osteotomies performed, and correction achieved (baseline to 3-month measurements) (p < 0.05). At 3 months, EQ-5D scores remained lower in the D group (74.0 vs 78.2, p = 0.044), and NDI scores were similar (48.5 vs 39.0, p = 0.053). However, neck pain improved in the D group (NRS score of 5.0 vs 4.3, p = 0.331), and modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association (mJOA) scores remained similar (14.2 vs 15.0, p = 0.211). At 6 months and 1 year, all HRQOL scores were similar between the 2 cohorts. One-year measurements were as follows: NDI 39.7 vs 40.7 (p = 0.878), NRS neck pain score of 4.1 vs 5.0 (p = 0.326), EQ-5D score of 77.1 vs 78.2 (p = 0.646), and mJOA score of 14.0 vs 14.2 (p = 0.835). Anxiety/depression levels reported on the EQ-5D scale were significantly higher in the depressed cohort at baseline, 3 months, and 6 months (all p < 0.05), but were similar between groups at 1 year postoperatively (1.72 vs 1.53, p = 0.416).

CONCLUSIONS

Clinical depression was observed in many of the study patients with CD. After matching for baseline deformity, depression symptomology resulted in worse baseline EQ-5D and pain scores. Despite these baseline differences, both cohorts achieved similar results in all HRQOL assessments 6 months and 1 year postoperatively, demonstrating no clinical impact of depression on recovery up until 1 year after CD surgery. Thus, a history of depression does not appear to have an impact on recovery from CD surgery.

Free access

Christopher P. Ames, Justin S. Smith, Robert Eastlack, Donald J. Blaskiewicz, Christopher I. Shaffrey, Frank Schwab, Shay Bess, Han Jo Kim, Gregory M. Mundis Jr., Eric Klineberg, Munish Gupta, Michael O’Brien, Richard Hostin, Justin K. Scheer, Themistocles S. Protopsaltis, Kai-Ming G. Fu, Robert Hart, Todd J. Albert, K. Daniel Riew, Michael G. Fehlings, Vedat Deviren, Virginie Lafage and International Spine Study Group

OBJECT

Despite the complexity of cervical spine deformity (CSD) and its significant impact on patient quality of life, there exists no comprehensive classification system. The objective of this study was to develop a novel classification system based on a modified Delphi approach and to characterize the intra- and interobserver reliability of this classification.

METHODS

Based on an extensive literature review and a modified Delphi approach with an expert panel, a CSD classification system was generated. The classification system included a deformity descriptor and 5 modifiers that incorporated sagittal, regional, and global spinopelvic alignment and neurological status. The descriptors included: “C,” “CT,” and “T” for primary cervical kyphotic deformities with an apex in the cervical spine, cervicothoracic junction, or thoracic spine, respectively; “S” for primary coronal deformity with a coronal Cobb angle ≥ 15°; and “CVJ” for primary craniovertebral junction deformity. The modifiers included C2–7 sagittal vertical axis (SVA), horizontal gaze (chin-brow to vertical angle [CBVA]), T1 slope (TS) minus C2–7 lordosis (TS–CL), myelopathy (modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association [mJOA] scale score), and the Scoliosis Research Society (SRS)-Schwab classification for thoracolumbar deformity. Application of the classification system requires the following: 1) full-length standing posteroanterior (PA) and lateral spine radiographs that include the cervical spine and femoral heads; 2) standing PA and lateral cervical spine radiographs; 3) completed and scored mJOA questionnaire; and 4) a clinical photograph or radiograph that includes the skull for measurement of the CBVA. A series of 10 CSD cases, broadly representative of the classification system, were selected and sufficient radiographic and clinical history to enable classification were assembled. A panel of spinal deformity surgeons was queried to classify each case twice, with a minimum of 1 intervening week. Inter- and intrarater reliability measures were based on calculations of Fleiss k coefficient values.

RESULTS

Twenty spinal deformity surgeons participated in this study. Interrater reliability (Fleiss k coefficients) for the deformity descriptor rounds 1 and 2 were 0.489 and 0.280, respectively, and mean intrarater reliability was 0.584. For the modifiers, including the SRS-Schwab components, the interrater (round 1/round 2) and intrarater reliabilities (Fleiss k coefficients) were: C2–7 SVA (0.338/0.412, 0.584), horizontal gaze (0.779/0.430, 0.768), TS-CL (0.721/0.567, 0.720), myelopathy (0.602/0.477, 0.746), SRS-Schwab curve type (0.590/0.433, 0.564), pelvic incidence-lumbar lordosis (0.554/0.386, 0.826), pelvic tilt (0.714/0.627, 0.633), and C7-S1 SVA (0.071/0.064, 0.233), respectively. The parameter with the poorest reliability was the C7–S1 SVA, which may have resulted from differences in interpretation of positive and negative measurements.

CONCLUSIONS

The proposed classification provides a mechanism to assess CSD within the framework of global spinopelvic malalignment and clinically relevant parameters. The intra- and interobserver reliabilities suggest moderate agreement and serve as the basis for subsequent improvement and study of the proposed classification.

Full access

Taemin Oh, Justin K. Scheer, Robert Eastlack, Justin S. Smith, Virginie Lafage, Themistocles S. Protopsaltis, Eric Klineberg, Peter G. Passias, Vedat Deviren, Richard Hostin, Munish Gupta, Shay Bess, Frank Schwab, Christopher I. Shaffrey and Christopher P. Ames

OBJECT

Alignment changes in the cervical spine that occur following surgical correction for thoracic deformity remain poorly understood. The purpose of this study was to evaluate such changes in a cohort of adults with thoracic deformity treated surgically.

METHODS

The authors conducted a multicenter retrospective analysis of consecutive patients with thoracic deformity. Inclusion criteria for this study were as follows: corrective osteotomy for thoracic deformity, upper-most instrumented vertebra (UIV) between T-1 and T-4, lower-most instrumented vertebra (LIV) at or above L-5 (LIV ≥ L-5) or at the ilium (LIV-ilium), and a minimum radiographic follow-up of 2 years. Sagittal radiographic parameters were assessed preoperatively as well as at 3 months and 2 years postoperatively, including the C-7 sagittal vertical axis (SVA), C2–7 cervical lordosis (CL), C2–7 SVA, T-1 slope (T1S), T1S minus CL (T1S-CL), T2–12 thoracic kyphosis (TK), apical TK, lumbar lordosis (LL), pelvic incidence (PI), PI-LL, pelvic tilt (PT), and sacral slope (SS).

RESULTS

Fifty-seven patients with a mean age of 49.1 ± 14.6 years met the study inclusion criteria. The preoperative prevalence of increased CL (CL > 15°) was 48.9%. Both 3-month and 2-year apical TK improved from baseline (p < 0.05, statistically significant). At the 2-year follow-up, only the C2–7 SVA increased significantly from baseline (p = 0.01), whereas LL decreased from baseline (p < 0.01). The prevalence of increased CL was 35.3% at 3 months and 47.8% at 2 years, which did not represent a significant change. Postoperative cervical alignment changes were not significantly different from preoperative values regardless of the LIV (LIV ≥ L-5 or LIV-ilium, p > 0.05 for both). In a subset of patients with a maximum TK ≥ 60° (35 patients) and 3-column osteotomy (38 patients), no significant postoperative cervical changes were seen.

CONCLUSION

Increased CL is common in adult spinal deformity patients with thoracic deformities and, unlike after lumbar corrective surgery, does not appear to normalize after thoracic corrective surgery. Cervical sagittal malalignment (C2–7 SVA) also increases postoperatively. Surgeons should be aware that spontaneous cervical alignment normalization might not occur following thoracic deformity correction.

Full access

Justin K. Scheer, Justin S. Smith, Aaron J. Clark, Virginie Lafage, Han Jo Kim, John D. Rolston, Robert Eastlack, Robert A. Hart, Themistocles S. Protopsaltis, Michael P. Kelly, Khaled Kebaish, Munish Gupta, Eric Klineberg, Richard Hostin, Christopher I. Shaffrey, Frank Schwab, Christopher P. Ames and the International Spine Study Group

OBJECT

Back and leg pain are the primary outcomes of adult spinal deformity (ASD) and predict patients' seeking of surgical management. The authors sought to characterize changes in back and leg pain after operative or nonoperative management of ASD. Outcomes were assessed according to pain severity, type of surgical procedure, Scoliosis Research Society (SRS)–Schwab spine deformity class, and patient satisfaction.

METHODS

This study retrospectively reviewed data in a prospective multicenter database of ASD patients. Inclusion criteria were the following: age > 18 years and presence of spinal deformity as defined by a scoliosis Cobb angle ≥ 20°, sagittal vertical axis length ≥ 5 cm, pelvic tilt angle ≥ 25°, or thoracic kyphosis angle ≥ 60°. Patients were grouped into nonoperated and operated subcohorts and by the type of surgical procedure, spine SRS-Schwab deformity class, preoperative pain severity, and patient satisfaction. Numerical rating scale (NRS) scores of back and leg pain, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores, physical component summary (PCS) scores of the 36-Item Short Form Health Survey, minimum clinically important differences (MCIDs), and substantial clinical benefits (SCBs) were assessed.

RESULTS

Patients in whom ASD had been operatively managed were 6 times more likely to have an improvement in back pain and 3 times more likely to have an improvement in leg pain than patients in whom ASD had been nonoperatively managed. Patients whose ASD had been managed nonoperatively were more likely to have their back or leg pain remain the same or worsen. The incidence of postoperative leg pain was 37.0% at 6 weeks postoperatively and 33.3% at the 2-year follow-up (FU). At the 2-year FU, among patients with any preoperative back or leg pain, 24.3% and 37.8% were free of back and leg pain, respectively, and among patients with severe (NRS scores of 7–10) preoperative back or leg pain, 21.0% and 32.8% were free of back and leg pain, respectively. Decompression resulted in more patients having an improvement in leg pain and their pain scores reaching MCID. Although osteotomies improved back pain, they were associated with a higher incidence of leg pain. Patients whose spine had an SRS-Schwab coronal curve Type N deformity (sagittal malalignment only) were least likely to report improvements in back pain. Patients with a Type L deformity were most likely to report improved back or leg pain and to have reductions in pain severity scores reaching MCID and SCB. Patients with a Type D deformity were least likely to report improved leg pain and were more likely to experience a worsening of leg pain. Preoperative pain severity affected pain improvement over 2 years because patients who had higher preoperative pain severity experienced larger improvements, and their changes in pain severity were more likely to reach MCID/SCB than for those reporting lower preoperative pain. Reductions in back pain contributed to improvements in ODI and PCS scores and to patient satisfaction more than reductions in leg pain did.

CONCLUSIONS

The authors' results provide a valuable reference for counseling patients preoperatively about what improvements or worsening in back or leg pain they may experience after surgical intervention for ASD.