Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 10 of 10 items for :

  • "sagittal alignment" x
  • By Author: Burton, Douglas x
Clear All
Full access

Renaud Lafage, Ibrahim Obeid, Barthelemy Liabaud, Shay Bess, Douglas Burton, Justin S. Smith, Cyrus Jalai, Richard Hostin, Christopher I. Shaffrey, Christopher Ames, Han Jo Kim, Eric Klineberg, Frank Schwab, Virginie Lafage and the International Spine Study Group

levels above UIV. Statistical Analysis The collected demographic, surgical, and radiographic data were described and analyzed at baseline and immediate postoperative follow-up. Changes in radiographic alignment were also investigated, including a preoperative to postoperative analysis of sagittal alignment and the rate of radiographic PJK. Patients were stratified into 5 groups based on the preoperative to postoperative degree of change in LL: decrease in LL (kyphotic change > 5°), stable (change between −5° and 5°), 5°–15° increase (lordotic change of 5°–15°), 15

Full access

Blake N. Staub, Renaud Lafage, Han Jo Kim, Christopher I. Shaffrey, Gregory M. Mundis Jr., Richard Hostin, Douglas Burton, Lawrence Lenke, Munish C. Gupta, Christopher Ames, Eric Klineberg, Shay Bess, Frank Schwab, Virginie Lafage and the International Spine Study Group

M uch has been written on the relationship between patient-reported outcomes and sagittal alignment in thoracolumbar deformities. 5–8 , 12 , 17 , 18 , 23 Although simple equations were initially used to identify thoracolumbar deformities, more recently, patient-specific formulas have been developed to more specifically quantify each deformity. 10 , 22 However, cervical spine studies have yet to define a fundamental equation, let alone patient-specific descriptors, that both elucidate a deformity and suggest a nidus for correction. The cervical sagittal

Restricted access

Virginie Lafage, Frank Schwab, Shaleen Vira, Robert Hart, Douglas Burton, Justin S. Smith, Oheneba Boachie-Adjei, Alexis Shelokov, Richard Hostin, Christopher I. Shaffrey, Munish Gupta, Behrooz A. Akbarnia, Shay Bess and Jean-Pierre Farcy

S pinal deformity in the adult is commonly a 3D pathology. However, evidence points toward the clinical impact of deformity being mostly related to the sagittal plane, with little correlation between coronal deformity and self-reported disability. The Classification of Adult Deformity 20 was primarily built on clinical impact parameters, and it highlights lumbar lordosis as well as global sagittal alignment. Work leading to the classification did not identify a significant clinical impact of coronal plane parameters. 20 Additionally, in the commonly known

Restricted access

Virginie Lafage, Neil J. Bharucha, Frank Schwab, Robert A. Hart, Douglas Burton, Oheneba Boachie-Adjei, Justin S. Smith, Richard Hostin, Christopher Shaffrey, Munish Gupta, Behrooz A. Akbarnia and Shay Bess

sagittal alignment to maintain upright posture. Recently, increased PT has also been shown to correlate with worse HRQOL scores. 11 In certain cases of sagittal malalignment, a corrective osteotomy can be performed to restore balance. Pedicle subtraction osteotomy is an increasingly used technique to correct sagittal plane deformities and can obtain approximately 25° of increased lordosis when performed in the lumbar spine. 4 , 12 , 23 One of the challenges of the PSO technique is accurately predicting the postoperative spinopelvic alignment. Achieving spinopelvic

Full access

Alexander A. Theologis, Gregory M. Mundis Jr., Stacie Nguyen, David O. Okonkwo, Praveen V. Mummaneni, Justin S. Smith, Christopher I. Shaffrey, Richard Fessler, Shay Bess, Frank Schwab, Bassel G. Diebo, Douglas Burton, Robert Hart, Vedat Deviren and Christopher Ames

patients (mean preoperative Cobb angle 38.9°) treated with multilevel minimally invasive LIF (mean 2.8 levels per patient) and open PSF, the postoperative average Cobb angle was 13.4°. 33 In their comparative group, consisting of 4 patients who underwent posterior-only instrumentation combined with posterior interbody fusion at a variable number of levels (ranging from none to 3 levels), the mean values for curve correction were lower than in patients treated with the combination of minimally invasive LIF and open PSF. 33 Regional sagittal alignment is not

Restricted access

Nitin Agarwal, Federico Angriman, Ezequiel Goldschmidt, James Zhou, Adam S. Kanter, David O. Okonkwo, Peter G. Passias, Themistocles Protopsaltis, Virginie Lafage, Renaud Lafage, Frank Schwab, Shay Bess, Christopher Ames, Justin S. Smith, Christopher I. Shaffrey, Douglas Burton, D. Kojo Hamilton and the International Spine Study Group

single center (New York University Hospital for Joint Disease). Explanatory Variables and Outcomes The primary outcome was change in global sagittal alignment at 1 year after surgery. The primary independent variable considered was baseline (preoperative) BMI. Additional important clinical predictors extracted included age, sex, smoking status, active malignancy, chronic lung disease, chronic arthritis, and major depression. Secondary outcomes included HRQoL determined by use of the ODI and SRS-22. Statistical Analysis Descriptive statistics were used to determine

Free access

Background/Introduction: Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) has become a popular surgical option to complement posterolateral fusion (PLF) for treatment of degenerative spinal conditions. Purported advantages of TLIF over PLF alone include enhanced fusion rates, improved sagittal alignment, and direct decompression of the neuroforamen. Earlier studies have examined these issues and yielded inconclusive results. Another often suggested advantage, that TLIF provides superior immediate stability and protects against early pedicle screw loosening, has never been

Free access

greater Charlson comorbidity index (1.1 vs 0.85) than NONOP (n=446), respectively (p<0.05). OP had worse HRQOL scores on all surveys than NONOP (p<0.05). OP and NONOP had similar coronal alignment (p<0.05). OP had worse sagittal spinopelvic alignment for all measures than NONOP except cervical lordosis, TK and pelvic incidence (PI). OP had greater percentage of pure sagittal classification (type S; OP=23%, NON=14%; p<0.05). OP had worse grades for all modifier categories: PT (26% vs 16%), PI-lumbar lordosis mismatch (37% vs 21%) and global sagittal alignment (29% vs 9

Free access

sagittal alignment as well as for correction of PI-LL. HYB was effective in restoring sagittal global alignment and cMIS in maintaining it. J Neurosurg Journal of Neurosurgery JNS 0022-3085 1933-0693 American Association of Neurological Surgeons 2015.6.JNS.AANS2014ABSTRACTS Philip L. Gildenberg Resident Award 630. Striatal Stimulation for Enhancement of Recovery in a Rodent Traumatic Brain Injury Model Joshua Paul Aronson , MD , Husam Katnani , PhD , Jimmy Yang , BA , Matthew Thombs , BA