Change in sagittal alignment after decompression alone in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis without significant deformity: a prospective cohort study

View More View Less
  • 1 Spine Unit, Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Zealand University Hospital, Køge, Denmark; and
  • | 2 Spine Surgery and Research, Spine Center of Southern Denmark, Lillebaelt Hospital, Middelfart, Denmark
Restricted access

Purchase Now

USD  $45.00

Spine - 1 year subscription bundle (Individuals Only)

USD  $376.00

JNS + Pediatrics + Spine - 1 year subscription bundle (Individuals Only)

USD  $612.00
Print or Print + Online

OBJECTIVE

The authors’ objective was to investigate whether sagittal balance improves in patients with spinal stenosis after decompression alone.

METHODS

This prospective longitudinal cohort study compared preoperative and 6-month postoperative 36-inch full-length radiographs in patients aged older than 60 years. Patients underwent decompression alone for central lumbar spinal stenosis with either a minimally invasive bilateral laminotomy for central decompression, unilateral laminectomy as an over-the-top procedure for bilateral decompression, or traditional wide laminectomy with removal of the spinous processes on both sides. The following radiographic parameters were measured: sagittal vertical axis (SVA), lumbar lordosis (LL), pelvic tilt (PT), pelvic incidence (PI), PI-LL mismatch, coronal Cobb angle, and sacral slope (SS). Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) were collected, including scores on the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), visual analog scale (VAS) for leg and back pain, and EQ-5D.

RESULTS

Forty-five patients (24 males) with a mean ± SD age of 71.8 ± 5.6 years were included. Sagittal balance showed statistically significant improvement, with the mean SVA decreasing from 52.3 mm preoperatively to 33.9 mm postoperatively (p = 0.0001). The authors found an increase in LL, from mean −41.5° preoperatively to −43.9° postoperatively, but this was not statistically significant (p = 0.055). A statistically significant decrease in PI-LL mismatch from mean 8.4° preoperatively to 5.8° postoperatively was found (p = 0.002). All PROM scores showed significant improvement after spinal decompression surgery. The correlations between SVA and all PROMs were statistically significant at both preoperative and postoperative time points, although most correlations were weak except for those between preoperative SVA and ODI (r = 0.55) and between SVA and VAS for leg pain (r = 0.58).

CONCLUSIONS

Sagittal balance and PROMs show improvement at short-term follow-up evaluations in patients who have undergone decompression alone for lumbar spinal stenosis.

ABBREVIATIONS

LL = lumbar lordosis; LSS = lumbar spinal stenosis; ODI = Oswestry Disability Index; PI = pelvic incidence; PROM = patient-report outcome measure; PT = pelvic tilt; SS = sacral slope; SVA = sagittal vertical axis; VAS = visual analog scale.

Spine - 1 year subscription bundle (Individuals Only)

USD  $376.00

JNS + Pediatrics + Spine - 1 year subscription bundle (Individuals Only)

USD  $612.00
  • 1

    Kalichman L, Cole R, Kim DH, Li L, Suri P, Guermazi A, Hunter DJ. Spinal stenosis prevalence and association with symptoms: the Framingham Study. Spine J. 2009;9(7):545550.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 2

    Kreiner DS, Shaffer WO, Baisden JL, Gilbert TJ, Summers JT, Toton JF, et al. An evidence-based clinical guideline for the diagnosis and treatment of degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis (update). Spine J. 2013;13(7):734743.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 3

    Le Huec JC, Charosky S, Barrey C, Rigal J, Aunoble S. Sagittal imbalance cascade for simple degenerative spine and consequences: algorithm of decision for appropriate treatment. Eur Spine J. 2011;20(suppl 5):699703.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 4

    Barrey C, Roussouly P, Le Huec JC, D’Acunzi G, Perrin G. Compensatory mechanisms contributing to keep the sagittal balance of the spine. Eur Spine J. 2013;22(suppl 6):S834S841.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 5

    Le Huec JC, Thompson W, Mohsinaly Y, Barrey C, Faundez A. Sagittal balance of the spine. Eur Spine J. 2019;28(9):18891905.

  • 6

    Barrey C, Roussouly P, Perrin G, Le Huec JC. Sagittal balance disorders in severe degenerative spine. Can we identify the compensatory mechanisms? Eur Spine J. 2011;20(suppl 5):626633.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 7

    Schwab FJ, Blondel B, Bess S, Hostin R, Shaffrey CI, Smith JS, et al. Radiographical spinopelvic parameters and disability in the setting of adult spinal deformity: a prospective multicenter analysis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976).2013;38(13):E803E812.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 8

    Ames CP, Smith JS, Scheer JK, Bess S, Bederman SS, Deviren V, et al. Impact of spinopelvic alignment on decision making in deformity surgery in adults: a review. J Neurosurg Spine. 2012;16(6):547564.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 9

    Diebo BG, Henry J, Lafage V, Berjano P. Sagittal deformities of the spine: factors influencing the outcomes and complications. Eur Spine J. 2015;24(suppl 1):S3S15.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 10

    Mac-Thiong JM, Transfeldt EE, Mehbod AA, Perra JH, Denis F, Garvey TA, et al. Can C7 plumbline and gravity line predict health related quality of life in adult scoliosis? Spine (Phila Pa 1976).2009;34(15):E519E527.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 11

    Glassman SD, Bridwell K, Dimar JR, Horton W, Berven S, Schwab F. The impact of positive sagittal balance in adult spinal deformity. Spine (Phila Pa 1976).2005;30(18):20242029.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 12

    Bayerl SH, Pöhlmann F, Finger T, Onken J, Franke J, Czabanka M, et al. The sagittal balance does not influence the 1 year clinical outcome of patients with lumbar spinal stenosis without obvious instability after microsurgical decompression. Spine (Phila Pa 1976).2015;40(13):10141021.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 13

    Ogura Y, Shinozaki Y, Kobayashi Y, Kitagawa T, Yonezawa Y, Takahashi Y, et al. Impact of sagittal spinopelvic alignment on clinical outcomes and health-related quality of life after decompression surgery without fusion for lumbar spinal stenosis. J Neurosurg Spine. 2019;30(4):470475.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 14

    Dohzono S, Toyoda H, Takahashi S, Matsumoto T, Suzuki A, Terai H, Nakamura H. Factors associated with improvement in sagittal spinal alignment after microendoscopic laminotomy in patients with lumbar spinal canal stenosis. J Neurosurg Spine. 2016;25(1):3945.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 15

    Ogura Y, Shinozaki Y, Kobayashi Y, Kitagawa T, Yonezawa Y, Takahashi Y, et al. Impact of decompression surgery without fusion for lumbar spinal stenosis on sagittal spinopelvic alignment: minimum 2-year follow-up. J Neurosurg Spine. 2019;30(6):17.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 16

    Horton WC, Brown CW, Bridwell KH, Glassman SD, Suk SI, Cha CW. Is there an optimal patient stance for obtaining a lateral 36" radiograph? A critical comparison of three techniques. Spine (Phila Pa 1976).2005;30(4):427433.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 17

    Andersen M, Nielsen M, Helmig P, Eiskjær S. Rygkirurgi i Danmark Årsrapport 2019. DaneSpine; 2020.Accessed November 1, 2021. http://drks.ortopaedi.dk/wp-content/uploads/2020/06/Årsrapport-DRKS-2019-version-3.0-1.pdf

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 18

    Williamson A, Hoggart B. Pain: a review of three commonly used pain rating scales. J Clin Nurs. 2005;14(7):798804.

  • 19

    Sørensen J, Davidsen M, Gudex C, Pedersen KM, Brønnum-Hansen H. Danish EQ-5D population norms. Scand J Public Health. 2009;37(5):467474.

  • 20

    Lauridsen HH, Hartvigsen J, Manniche C, Korsholm L, Grunnet-Nilsson N. Danish version of the Oswestry disability index for patients with low back pain. Part 2: sensitivity, specificity and clinically significant improvement in two low back pain populations. Eur Spine J. 2006;15(11):17171728.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 21

    Lauridsen HH, Hartvigsen J, Manniche C, Korsholm L, Grunnet-Nilsson N. Danish version of the Oswestry Disability Index for patients with low back pain. Part 1: cross-cultural adaptation, reliability and validity in two different populations. Eur Spine J. 2006;15(11):17051716.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 22

    Langella F, Villafañe JH, Damilano M, Cecchinato R, Pejrona M, Ismael M, Berjano P. Predictive accuracy of Surgimap surgical planning for sagittal imbalance: a cohort study. Spine (Phila Pa 1976).2017;42(22):E1297E1304.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 23

    Lafage R, Ferrero E, Henry JK, Challier V, Diebo B, Liabaud B, et al. Validation of a new computer-assisted tool to measure spino-pelvic parameters. Spine J. 2015;15(12):24932502.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 24

    Dubousset J. Three-dimensional analysis of the scoliotic deformity. In: Weinstein SL, ed. The Pediatric Spine Principles and Practice. Raven Press;1994:479496.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 25

    Vialle R, Levassor N, Rillardon L, Templier A, Skalli W, Guigui P. Radiographic analysis of the sagittal alignment and balance of the spine in asymptomatic subjects. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2005;87(2):260267.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 26

    Berthonnaud E, Dimnet J, Roussouly P, Labelle H. Analysis of the sagittal balance of the spine and pelvis using shape and orientation parameters. J Spinal Disord Tech. 2005;18(1):4047.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 27

    Legaye J, Duval-Beaupère G, Hecquet J, Marty C. Pelvic incidence: a fundamental pelvic parameter for three-dimensional regulation of spinal sagittal curves. Eur Spine J. 1998;7(2):99103.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 28

    Mac-Thiong JM, Roussouly P, Berthonnaud E, Guigui P. Age- and sex-related variations in sagittal sacropelvic morphology and balance in asymptomatic adults. Eur Spine J. 2011;20(suppl 5):572577.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 29

    Pierre S. Reciprocal angulation of vertebral bodies in a sagittal plane: approach to references for the evaluation of kyphosis and lordosis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976).1982;7(4):335342.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 30

    Roussouly P, Gollogly S, Berthonnaud E, Dimnet J. Classification of the normal variation in the sagittal alignment of the human lumbar spine and pelvis in the standing position. Spine (Phila Pa 1976).2005;30(3):346353.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 31

    Boulay C, Tardieu C, Hecquet J, Benaim C, Mouilleseaux B, Marty C, et al. Sagittal alignment of spine and pelvis regulated by pelvic incidence: standard values and prediction of lordosis. Eur Spine J. 2006;15(4):415422.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 32

    Hammerberg EM, Wood KB. Sagittal profile of the elderly. J Spinal Disord Tech. 2003;16(1):4450.

  • 33

    Sebaaly A, Grobost P, Mallam L, Roussouly P. Description of the sagittal alignment of the degenerative human spine. Eur Spine J. 2018;27(2):489496.

  • 34

    Schwab F, Lafage V, Boyce R, Skalli W, Farcy JP. Gravity line analysis in adult volunteers: age-related correlation with spinal parameters, pelvic parameters, and foot position. Spine (Phila Pa 1976).2006;31(25):E959E967.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 35

    Gelb DE, Lenke LG, Bridwell KH, Blanke K, McEnery KW. An analysis of sagittal spinal alignment in 100 asymptomatic middle and older aged volunteers. Spine (Phila Pa 1976).1995;20(12):13511358.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 36

    Jackson RP, McManus AC. Radiographic analysis of sagittal plane alignment and balance in standing volunteers and patients with low back pain matched for age, sex, and size. A prospective controlled clinical study. Spine (Phila Pa 1976).1994;19(14)(suppl):16111618.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 37

    Fujii K, Kawamura N, Ikegami M, Niitsuma G, Kunogi J. Radiological improvements in global sagittal alignment after lumbar decompression without fusion. Spine (Phila Pa 1976).2015;40(10):703709.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 38

    Chang HS. Effect of sagittal spinal balance on the outcome of decompression surgery for lumbar canal stenosis. World Neurosurg. 2018;119:e200e208.

  • 39

    Schwab F, Patel A, Ungar B, Farcy JP, Lafage V. Adult spinal deformity—postoperative standing imbalance assessing alignment and planning corrective surgery. Spine (Phila Pa 1976).2010;35(25):22242231.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 40

    Garbossa D, Pejrona M, Damilano M, Sansone V, Ducati A, Berjano P. Pelvic parameters and global spine balance for spine degenerative disease: the importance of containing for the well being of content. Eur Spine J. 2014;23(suppl 6):616627.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 41

    Legaye J. Influence of age and sagittal balance of the spine on the value of the pelvic incidence. Eur Spine J. 23(7):13941399.

  • 42

    Bao H, Liabaud B, Varghese J, Lafage R, Diebo BG, Jalai C, et al. Lumbosacral stress and age may contribute to increased pelvic incidence: an analysis of 1625 adults. Eur Spine J. 2018;27(2):482488.

    • Crossref
    • PubMed
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

Metrics

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 510 510 510
Full Text Views 55 55 55
PDF Downloads 78 78 78
EPUB Downloads 0 0 0