Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 10 of 59 items for

  • Author or Editor: Christopher I. Shaffrey x
  • By Author: Lafage, Virginie x
Clear All Modify Search
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

Object

Pedicle subtraction osteotomy (PSO) is a spinal realignment technique that may be used to correct sagittal spinal imbalance. Theoretically, the level and degree of resection via a PSO should impact the degree of sagittal plane correction in the setting of deformity. However, the quantitative effect of PSO level and focal angular change on postoperative spinopelvic parameters has not been well described. The purpose of this study is to analyze the relationship between the level/degree of PSO and changes in global sagittal balance and spinopelvic parameters.

Methods

In this multicenter retrospective study, 70 patients (54 women and 16 men) underwent lumbar PSO surgery for spinal imbalance. Preoperative and postoperative free-standing sagittal radiographs were obtained and analyzed by regional curves (lumbar, thoracic, and thoracolumbar), pelvic parameters (pelvic incidence and pelvic tilt [PT]) and global balance (sagittal vertical axis [SVA] and T-1 spinopelvic inclination). Correlations between PSO parameters (level and degree of change in angle between the 2 adjacent vertebrae) and spinopelvic measurements were analyzed.

Results

Pedicle subtraction osteotomy distribution by level and degree of correction was as follows: L-1 (6 patients, 24°), L-2 (15 patients, 24°), L-3 (29 patients, 25°), and L-4 (20 patients, 22°). There was no significant difference in the focal correction achieved by PSO by level. All patients demonstrated changes in preoperative to postoperative parameters including increased lumbar lordosis (from 20° to 49°, p < 0.001), increased thoracic kyphosis (from 30° to 38°, p < 0.001), decreased SVA and T-1 spinopelvic inclination (from 122 to 34 mm, p < 0.001 and from +3° to −4°, p < 0.001, respectively), and decreased PT (from 31° to 23°, p < 0.001). More caudal PSO was correlated with greater PT reduction (r = −0.410, p < 0.05). No correlation was found between SVA correction and PSO location. The PSO degree was correlated with change in thoracic kyphosis (r = −0.474, p < 0.001), lumbar lordosis (r = 0.667, p < 0.001), sacral slope (r = 0.426, p < 0.001), and PT (r = −0.358, p < 0.005).

Conclusions

The degree of PSO resection correlates more with spinopelvic parameters (lumbar lordosis, thoracic kyphosis, PT, and sacral slope) than PSO level. More importantly, PSO level impacts postoperative PT correction but not SVA.

Restricted access

Christopher P. Ames, Justin S. Smith, Justin K. Scheer, Shay Bess, S. Samuel Bederman, Vedat Deviren, Virginie Lafage, Frank Schwab and Christopher I. Shaffrey

Sagittal spinal misalignment (SSM) is an established cause of pain and disability. Treating physicians must be familiar with the radiographic findings consistent with SSM. Additionally, the restoration or maintenance of physiological sagittal spinal alignment after reconstructive spinal procedures is imperative to achieve good clinical outcomes. The C-7 plumb line (sagittal vertical axis) has traditionally been used to evaluate sagittal spinal alignment; however, recent data indicate that the measurement of spinopelvic parameters provides a more comprehensive assessment of sagittal spinal alignment. In this review the authors describe the proper analysis of spinopelvic alignment for surgical planning. Online videos supplement the text to better illustrate the key concepts.

Restricted access

Frank J. Schwab, Ashish Patel, Christopher I. Shaffrey, Justin S. Smith, Jean-Pierre Farcy, Oheneba Boachie-Adjei, Richard A. Hostin, Robert A. Hart, Behrooz A. Akbarnia, Douglas C. Burton, Shay Bess and Virginie Lafage

Object

Pedicle subtraction osteotomy (PSO) is a surgical procedure that is frequently performed on patients with sagittal spinopelvic malalignment. Although it allows for substantial spinopelvic realignment, suboptimal realignment outcomes have been reported in up to 33% of patients. The authors' objective in the present study was to identify differences in radiographic profiles and surgical procedures between patients achieving successful versus failed spinopelvic realignment following PSO.

Methods

This study is a multicenter retrospective consecutive PSO case series. The authors evaluated 99 cases involving patients who underwent PSO for sagittal spinopelvic malalignment. Because precise cutoffs of acceptable residual postoperative sagittal vertical axis (SVA) values have not been well defined, comparisons were focused between patient groups with a postoperative SVA that could be clearly considered either a success or a failure. Only cases in which the patients had a postoperative SVA of less than 50 mm (successful PSO realignment) or more than 100 mm (failed PSO realignment) were included in the analysis. Radiographic measures and PSO parameters were compared between successful and failed PSO realignments.

Results

Seventy-nine patients met the inclusion criteria. Successful realignment was achieved in 61 patients (77%), while realignment failed in 18 (23%). Patients with failed realignment had larger preoperative SVA (mean 217.9 vs 106.7 mm, p < 0.01), larger pelvic tilt (mean 36.9° vs 30.7°, p < 0.01), larger pelvic incidence (mean 64.2° vs 53.7°, p < 0.01), and greater lumbar lordosis–pelvic incidence mismatch (−47.1° vs −30.9°, p < 0.01) compared with those in whom realignment was successful. Failed and successful realignments were similar regarding the vertebral level of the PSO, the median size of wedge resection 22.0° (interquartile range 16.5°−28.5°), and the numerical changes in pre- and postoperative spinopelvic parameters (p > 0.05).

Conclusions

Patients with failed PSO realignments had significantly larger preoperative spinopelvic deformity than patients in whom realignment was successful. Despite their apparent need for greater correction, the patients in the failed realignment group only received the same amount of correction as those in the successfully realigned patients. A single-level standard PSO may not achieve optimal outcome in patients with high preoperative spinopelvic sagittal malalignment. Patients with large spinopelvic deformities should receive larger osteotomies or additional corrective procedures beyond PSOs to avoid undercorrection.

Restricted access

Manish K. Kasliwal, Justin S. Smith, Christopher I. Shaffrey, Leah Y. Carreon, Steven D. Glassman, Frank Schwab, Virginie Lafage, Kai-Ming G. Fu and Keith H. Bridwell

Object

In many adults with scoliosis, symptoms can be principally referable to focal pathology and can be addressed with short-segment procedures, such as decompression with or without fusion. A number of patients subsequently require more extensive scoliosis correction. However, there is a paucity of data on the impact of prior short-segment surgeries on the outcome of subsequent major scoliosis correction, which could be useful in preoperative counseling and surgical decision making. The authors' objective was to assess whether prior focal decompression or short-segment fusion of a limited portion of a larger spinal deformity impacts surgical parameters and clinical outcomes in patients who subsequently require more extensive scoliosis correction surgery.

Methods

The authors conducted a retrospective cohort analysis with propensity scoring, based on a prospective multicenter deformity database. Study inclusion criteria included a patient age ≥ 21 years, a primary diagnosis of untreated adult idiopathic or degenerative scoliosis with a Cobb angle ≥ 20°, and available clinical outcome measures at a minimum of 2 years after scoliosis surgery. Patients with prior short-segment surgery (< 5 levels) were propensity matched to patients with no prior surgery based on patient age, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Cobb angle, and sagittal vertical axis.

Results

Thirty matched pairs were identified. Among those patients who had undergone previous spine surgery, 30% received instrumentation, 40% underwent arthrodesis, and the mean number of operated levels was 2.4 ± 0.9 (mean ± SD). As compared with patients with no history of spine surgery, those who did have a history of prior spine surgery trended toward greater blood loss and an increased number of instrumented levels and did not differ significantly in terms of complication rates, duration of surgery, or clinical outcome based on the ODI, Scoliosis Research Society-22r, or 12-Item Short Form Health Survey Physical Component Score (p > 0.05).

Conclusions

Patients with adult scoliosis and a history of short-segment spine surgery who later undergo more extensive scoliosis correction do not appear to have significantly different complication rates or clinical improvements as compared with patients who have not had prior short-segment surgical procedures. These findings should serve as a basis for future prospective study.

Restricted access

Justin S. Smith, Christopher I. Shaffrey, Virginie Lafage, Benjamin Blondel, Frank Schwab, Richard Hostin, Robert Hart, Brian O'Shaughnessy, Shay Bess, Serena S. Hu, Vedat Deviren, Christopher P. Ames and International Spine Study Group

Object

Sagittal spinopelvic malalignment is a significant cause of pain and disability in patients with adult spinal deformity. Surgical correction of spinopelvic malalignment can result in compensatory changes in spinal alignment outside of the fused spinal segments. These compensatory changes, termed reciprocal changes, have been defined for thoracic and lumbar regions but not for the cervical spine. The object of this study was to evaluate postoperative reciprocal changes within the cervical spine following lumbar pedicle subtraction osteotomy (PSO).

Methods

This was a multicenter retrospective radiographic analysis of patients from International Spine Study Group centers. Inclusion criteria were as follows: adults (>18 years old) with spinal deformity treated using lumbar PSO, a preoperative C7–S1 plumb line greater than 5 cm, and availability of pre- and postoperative full-length standing radiographs.

Results

Seventy-five patients (60 women, mean age 59 years) were included. The lumbar PSO significantly improved sagittal alignment, including the C7–S1 plumb line, C7–T12 inclination, and pelvic tilt (p <0.001). After lumbar PSO, reciprocal changes were seen to occur in C2–7 cervical lordosis (from 30.8° to 21.6°, p <0.001), C2–7 plumb line (from 27.0 mm to 22.9 mm), and T-1 slope (from −38.9° to −30.4°, p <0.001). Ideal correction of sagittal malalignment (postoperative sagittal vertical alignment < 50 mm) was associated with the greatest relaxation of cervical hyperlordosis (−12.4° vs −5.7°, p = 0.037). A change in cervical lordosis correlated with changes in T-1 slope (r = −0.621, p <0.001), C7–T12 inclination (r = 0.418, p <0.001), T12–S1 angle (r = −0.339, p = 0.005), and C7–S1 plumb line (r = 0.289, p = 0.018). Radiographic parameters that correlated with changes in cervical lordosis on multivariate linear regression analysis included change in T-1 slope and change in C2–7 plumb line (r2 = 0.53, p <0.001).

Conclusions

Adults with positive sagittal spinopelvic malalignment compensate with abnormally increased cervical lordosis in an effort to maintain horizontal gaze. Surgical correction of sagittal malalignment results in improvement of the abnormal cervical hyperlordosis through reciprocal changes.

Free access

Justin K. Scheer, Jessica A. Tang, Justin S. Smith, Frank L. Acosta Jr., Themistocles S. Protopsaltis, Benjamin Blondel, Shay Bess, Christopher I. Shaffrey, Vedat Deviren, Virginie Lafage, Frank Schwab, Christopher P. Ames and the International Spine Study Group

This paper is a narrative review of normal cervical alignment, methods for quantifying alignment, and how alignment is associated with cervical deformity, myelopathy, and adjacent-segment disease (ASD), with discussions of health-related quality of life (HRQOL). Popular methods currently used to quantify cervical alignment are discussed including cervical lordosis, sagittal vertical axis, and horizontal gaze with the chin-brow to vertical angle. Cervical deformity is examined in detail as deformities localized to the cervical spine affect, and are affected by, other parameters of the spine in preserving global sagittal alignment. An evolving trend is defining cervical sagittal alignment. Evidence from a few recent studies suggests correlations between radiographic parameters in the cervical spine and HRQOL. Analysis of the cervical regional alignment with respect to overall spinal pelvic alignment is critical. The article details mechanisms by which cervical kyphotic deformity potentially leads to ASD and discusses previous studies that suggest how postoperative sagittal malalignment may promote ASD. Further clinical studies are needed to explore the relationship of cervical malalignment and the development of ASD. Sagittal alignment of the cervical spine may play a substantial role in the development of cervical myelopathy as cervical deformity can lead to spinal cord compression and cord tension. Surgical correction of cervical myelopathy should always take into consideration cervical sagittal alignment, as decompression alone may not decrease cord tension induced by kyphosis. Awareness of the development of postlaminectomy kyphosis is critical as it relates to cervical myelopathy. The future direction of cervical deformity correction should include a comprehensive approach in assessing global cervicalpelvic relationships. Just as understanding pelvic incidence as it relates to lumbar lordosis was crucial in building our knowledge of thoracolumbar deformities, T-1 incidence and cervical sagittal balance can further our understanding of cervical deformities. Other important parameters that account for the cervical-pelvic relationship are surveyed in detail, and it is recognized that all such parameters need to be validated in studies that correlate HRQOL outcomes following cervical deformity correction.

Free access

Christopher P. Ames, Justin S. Smith, Justin K. Scheer, Christopher I. Shaffrey, Virginie Lafage, Vedat Deviren, Bertrand Moal, Themistocles Protopsaltis, Praveen V. Mummaneni, Gregory M. Mundis Jr., Richard Hostin, Eric Klineberg, Douglas C. Burton, Robert Hart, Shay Bess, Frank J. Schwab and the International Spine Study Group

Object

Cervical spine osteotomies are powerful techniques to correct rigid cervical spine deformity. Many variations exist, however, and there is no current standardized system with which to describe and classify cervical osteotomies. This complicates the ability to compare outcomes across procedures and studies. The authors' objective was to establish a universal nomenclature for cervical spine osteotomies to provide a common language among spine surgeons.

Methods

A proposed nomenclature with 7 anatomical grades of increasing extent of bone/soft tissue resection and destabilization was designed. The highest grade of resection is termed the major osteotomy, and an approach modifier is used to denote the surgical approach(es), including anterior (A), posterior (P), anterior-posterior (AP), posterior-anterior (PA), anterior-posterior-anterior (APA), and posterior-anterior-posterior (PAP). For cases in which multiple grades of osteotomies were performed, the highest grade is termed the major osteotomy, and lower-grade osteotomies are termed minor osteotomies. The nomenclature was evaluated by 11 reviewers through 25 different radiographic clinical cases. The review was performed twice, separated by a minimum 1-week interval. Reliability was assessed using Fleiss kappa coefficients.

Results

The average intrarater reliability was classified as “almost perfect agreement” for the major osteotomy (0.89 [range 0.60–1.00]) and approach modifier (0.99 [0.95–1.00]); it was classified as “moderate agreement” for the minor osteotomy (0.73 [range 0.41–1.00]). The average interrater reliability for the 2 readings was the following: major osteotomy, 0.87 (“almost perfect agreement”); approach modifier, 0.99 (“almost perfect agreement”); and minor osteotomy, 0.55 (“moderate agreement”). Analysis of only major osteotomy plus approach modifier yielded a classification that was “almost perfect” with an average intrarater reliability of 0.90 (0.63–1.00) and an interrater reliability of 0.88 and 0.86 for the two reviews.

Conclusions

The proposed cervical spine osteotomy nomenclature provides the surgeon with a simple, standard description of the various cervical osteotomies. The reliability analysis demonstrated that this system is consistent and directly applicable. Future work will evaluate the relationship between this system and health-related quality of life metrics.