Incidence and Risk Factors of Mechanical Complications After Posterior-Based Osteotomies for Correction of Moderate to Severe Adult Cervical Deformity: 1-Year and 2-Year Follow-up.
Journal
Neurosurgery
ISSN: 1524-4040
Titre abrégé: Neurosurgery
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 7802914
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 02 2022
01 02 2022
Historique:
received:
03
11
2020
accepted:
01
09
2021
pubmed:
8
1
2022
medline:
24
3
2022
entrez:
7
1
2022
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Rigid cervical deformity (CD) requires multilevel and/or high-grade osteotomies and long-construct fusions to achieve adequate correction. The incidence of mechanical complications (MCs) remains incompletely studied. To define the incidence and risk factors for MC. A retrospective review of consecutive patients with CD who underwent correction from 2010 to 2018 was performed. Inclusion criteria were cervical kyphosis >20° and/or cervical sagittal vertical axis (cSVA) >4 cm. MCs (junctional kyphosis/failure, pseudarthrosis, and implant failure) and reoperation at 1 and 2 yr were examined. Eighty-three patients were included. The mean age was 63.4 yr, and 61.0% were female. Fifty-three percent underwent 3-column osteotomies. After surgery, cervical parameters were significantly improved: cSVA (6.2 vs 3.8 cm, P < .001), cervical lordosis (6.3 vs -8.3°, P < .001), cervical scoliosis (CS) (6.5 vs 2.2°, P < .001), and T1 slope (41.7 vs 36.3°, P = .007). The MC rate was 28.9%: junctional (18.1%), implant (16.9%), and pseudarthrosis (10.8%). MC rates at 1 and 2 yr were 14.5% and 25.5%, respectively: junctional (9.6% and 17.6%), implant (9.6% and 17.6%), and pseudarthrosis (2.4% and 7.8%). The overall reoperation rate was 24.1%: 14.5% at 1 yr and 19.6% at 2 yr. Body mass index (BMI) (P = .015) and preoperative CS (P = .040) were independently associated with higher odds of MC. Receiver operating characteristic curves defined CS >5° to be the threshold of risk for MCs and reoperation. Correction of CD is effective by posterior-based osteotomes, but MCs are relatively high at 1 and 2 yr. BMI >30 and preoperative CS >5° predispose patients for MC and reoperation.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Rigid cervical deformity (CD) requires multilevel and/or high-grade osteotomies and long-construct fusions to achieve adequate correction. The incidence of mechanical complications (MCs) remains incompletely studied.
OBJECTIVE
To define the incidence and risk factors for MC.
METHODS
A retrospective review of consecutive patients with CD who underwent correction from 2010 to 2018 was performed. Inclusion criteria were cervical kyphosis >20° and/or cervical sagittal vertical axis (cSVA) >4 cm. MCs (junctional kyphosis/failure, pseudarthrosis, and implant failure) and reoperation at 1 and 2 yr were examined.
RESULTS
Eighty-three patients were included. The mean age was 63.4 yr, and 61.0% were female. Fifty-three percent underwent 3-column osteotomies. After surgery, cervical parameters were significantly improved: cSVA (6.2 vs 3.8 cm, P < .001), cervical lordosis (6.3 vs -8.3°, P < .001), cervical scoliosis (CS) (6.5 vs 2.2°, P < .001), and T1 slope (41.7 vs 36.3°, P = .007). The MC rate was 28.9%: junctional (18.1%), implant (16.9%), and pseudarthrosis (10.8%). MC rates at 1 and 2 yr were 14.5% and 25.5%, respectively: junctional (9.6% and 17.6%), implant (9.6% and 17.6%), and pseudarthrosis (2.4% and 7.8%). The overall reoperation rate was 24.1%: 14.5% at 1 yr and 19.6% at 2 yr. Body mass index (BMI) (P = .015) and preoperative CS (P = .040) were independently associated with higher odds of MC. Receiver operating characteristic curves defined CS >5° to be the threshold of risk for MCs and reoperation.
CONCLUSION
Correction of CD is effective by posterior-based osteotomes, but MCs are relatively high at 1 and 2 yr. BMI >30 and preoperative CS >5° predispose patients for MC and reoperation.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34995272
doi: 10.1227/NEU.0000000000001781
pii: 00006123-202202000-00008
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
207-214Commentaires et corrections
Type : CommentIn
Informations de copyright
Copyright © Congress of Neurological Surgeons 2021. All rights reserved.
Références
Smith JS, Line B, Bess S, et al. The health impact of adult cervical deformity in patients presenting for surgical treatment: comparison to United States population norms and chronic disease states based on the EuroQuol-5 dimensions questionnaire. Neurosurgery. 2017;80(5):716-725.
Scheer JK, Tang JA, Smith JS, et al. Cervical spine alignment, sagittal deformity, and clinical implications: a review. J Neurosurg Spine. 2013;19(2):141-159.
Pierce KE, Alas H, Brown AE, et al. PROMIS physical health domain scores are related to cervical deformity severity. J Craniovertebr Junction Spine. 2019;10(3):179-183.
Griegel-Morris P, Larson K, Mueller-Klaus K, Oatis CA. Incidence of common postural abnormalities in the cervical, shoulder, and thoracic regions and their association with pain in two age groups of healthy subjects. Phys Ther. 1992;72(6):425-431.
Deviren V, Scheer JK, Ames CP. Technique of cervicothoracic junction pedicle subtraction osteotomy for cervical sagittal imbalance: report of 11 cases. J Neurosurg Spine. 2011;15(2):174-181.
Etame AB, Wang AC, Than KD, La Marca F, Park P. Outcomes after surgery for cervical spine deformity: review of the literature. Neurosurg Focus. 2010;28(3):E14.
Ames CP, Smith JS, Scheer JK, et al. A standardized nomenclature for cervical spine soft-tissue release and osteotomy for deformity correction: clinical article. J Neurosurg Spine. 2013;19(3):269-278.
Etame AB, Than KD, Wang AC, La Marca F, Park P. Surgical management of symptomatic cervical or cervicothoracic kyphosis due to ankylosing spondylitis. Spine. 2008;33(16):E559-E564.
Smith JS, Ramchandran S, Lafage V, et al. Prospective multicenter assessment of early complication rates associated with adult cervical deformity surgery in 78 patients. Neurosurgery. 2016;79(3):378-388.
Ames CP, Smith JS, Scheer JK, et al. Impact of spinopelvic alignment on decision making in deformity surgery in adults: a review. J Neurosurg Spine. 2012;16(6):547-564.
Ames CP, Blondel B, Scheer JK, et al. Cervical radiographical alignment: comprehensive assessment techniques and potential importance in cervical myelopathy. Spine. 2013;38(22 suppl 1):S149-S160.
Kim YJ, Bridwell KH, Lenke LG, Cho KJ, Edwards CC II, Rinella AS. Pseudarthrosis in adult spinal deformity following multisegmental instrumentation and arthrodesis. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2006;88(4):721-728.
Kim YJ, Bridwell KH, Lenke LG, Rhim S, Cheh G. Pseudarthrosis in long adult spinal deformity instrumentation and fusion to the sacrum: prevalence and risk factor analysis of 144 cases. Spine. 2006;31(20):2329-2336.
Barton C, Noshchenko A, Patel V, Cain C, Kleck C, Burger E. Risk factors for rod fracture after posterior correction of adult spinal deformity with osteotomy: a retrospective case-series. Scoliosis. 2015;10:30.
Koller H, Ames C, Mehdian H, et al. Characteristics of deformity surgery in patients with severe and rigid cervical kyphosis (CK): results of the CSRS-Europe multi-centre study project. Eur Spine J. 2019;28(2):324-344.
Okamoto T, Neo M, Fujibayashi S, Ito H, Takemoto M, Nakamura T. Mechanical implant failure in posterior cervical spine fusion. Eur Spine J. 2012;21(2):328-334.
Passias PG, Vasquez-Montes D, Poorman GW, et al. Predictive model for distal junctional kyphosis after cervical deformity surgery. Spine J. 2018;18(12):2187-2194.
Sebaaly A, Gehrchen M, Silvestre C, et al. Mechanical complications in adult spinal deformity and the effect of restoring the spinal shapes according to the Roussouly classification: a multicentric study. Eur Spine J. 2019;29(4):904-913.
Maier SP, Smith JS, Schwab FJ, et al. Revision surgery after 3-column osteotomy in 335 patients with adult spinal deformity: intercenter variability and risk factors. Spine. 2014;39(11):881-885.
Smith JS, Shaffrey CI, Lafage R, et al. Three-column osteotomy for correction of cervical and cervicothoracic deformities: alignment changes and early complications in a multicenter prospective series of 23 patients. Eur Spine J. 2017;26(8):2128-2137.
Passias PG, Horn SR, Oh C, et al. Predicting the occurrence of postoperative distal junctional kyphosis in cervical deformity patients. Neurosurgery. 2020;86(1):E38-E46.
Lau D, Clark AJ, Scheer JK, et al. Proximal junctional kyphosis and failure after spinal deformity surgery: a systematic review of the literature as a background to classification development. Spine. 2014;39(25):2093-2102.
Costa F, Ortolina A, Galbusera F, et al. Pedicle screw cement augmentation. A mechanical pullout study on different cement augmentation techniques. Med Eng Phys. 2016;38(2):181-186.
Barnes AH, Eguizabal JA, Acosta FL Jr., Lotz JC, Buckley JM, Ames CP. Biomechanical pullout strength and stability of the cervical artificial pedicle screw. Spine. 2009;34(1):E16-E20.
Su BW, Shimer AL, Chinthakunta S, et al. Comparison of fatigue strength of C2 pedicle screws, C2 pars screws, and a hybrid construct in C1-C2 fixation. Spine. 2014;39(1):E12-E19.
Mesfin A, Bakhsh WR, Chuntarapas T, Riew KD. Cervical scoliosis: clinical and radiographic outcomes. Glob Spine J. 2016;6(1):7-13.