A Hierarchical Approach to Realignment Strategies in Adult Cervical Deformity Surgery.
Journal
Clinical spine surgery
ISSN: 2380-0194
Titre abrégé: Clin Spine Surg
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101675083
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 04 2023
01 04 2023
Historique:
received:
17
10
2022
accepted:
25
01
2023
pubmed:
16
3
2023
medline:
28
3
2023
entrez:
15
3
2023
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Retrospective cohort study. Construct an individualized cervical realignment strategy based on patient parameters at the presentation that results in superior 2-year health-related quality of life metrics and decreased rates of junctional failure and reoperation following adult cervical deformity surgery. Research has previously focused on adult cervical deformity realignment thresholds for maximizing clinical outcomes while minimizing complications. However, realignment strategies may differ based on patient presentation and clinical characteristics. We included adult cervical deformity patients with 2-year data. The optimal outcome was defined as meeting good clinical outcomes without distal junctional failure or reoperation. Radiographic parameters assessed included C2 Slope, C2-C7, McGregor's slope, TS-CL, cSVA, T1 slope, and preoperative lowest-instrumented vertebra (LIV) inclination angle. Conditional inference trees were used to establish thresholds for each parameter based on achieving the optimal outcome. Analysis of Covariance and multivariable logistic regression analysis, controlling for age, comorbidities, baseline deformity and disability, and surgical factors, assessed outcome rates for the hierarchical approach within each deformity group. One hundred twenty-seven patients were included. After correction, there was a significant difference in meeting the optimal outcome when correcting the C2 slope below 10 degrees (85% vs. 34%, P <0.001), along with lower rates of distal junctional failure (DJF) (7% vs. 42%, P <0.001). Next, after isolating patients below the C2 slope threshold, the selection of LIV with an inclination between 0 and 40 degrees demonstrated lower rates of distal junctional kyphosis and higher odds of meeting optimal outcome(OR: 4.2, P =0.011). The best third step was the correction of cSVA below 35 mm. This hierarchical approach (11% of the cohort) led to significantly lower rates of DJF (0% vs. 15%, P <0.007), reoperation (8% vs. 28%, P <0.001), and higher rates of meeting optimal outcome (93% vs. 36%, P <0.001) when controlling for age, comorbidities, and baseline deformity and disability. Our results indicate that the correction of C2 slope should be prioritized during cervical deformity surgery, with the selection of a stable LIV and correction of cervical SVA below the idealized threshold. Among the numerous radiographic parameters considered during preoperative planning for cervical deformity correction, our determinations help surgeons prioritize those realignment strategies that maximize the health-related quality of life outcomes and minimize complications. Level-III.
Sections du résumé
STUDY DESIGN
Retrospective cohort study.
OBJECTIVE
Construct an individualized cervical realignment strategy based on patient parameters at the presentation that results in superior 2-year health-related quality of life metrics and decreased rates of junctional failure and reoperation following adult cervical deformity surgery.
SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA
Research has previously focused on adult cervical deformity realignment thresholds for maximizing clinical outcomes while minimizing complications. However, realignment strategies may differ based on patient presentation and clinical characteristics.
METHODS
We included adult cervical deformity patients with 2-year data. The optimal outcome was defined as meeting good clinical outcomes without distal junctional failure or reoperation. Radiographic parameters assessed included C2 Slope, C2-C7, McGregor's slope, TS-CL, cSVA, T1 slope, and preoperative lowest-instrumented vertebra (LIV) inclination angle. Conditional inference trees were used to establish thresholds for each parameter based on achieving the optimal outcome. Analysis of Covariance and multivariable logistic regression analysis, controlling for age, comorbidities, baseline deformity and disability, and surgical factors, assessed outcome rates for the hierarchical approach within each deformity group.
RESULTS
One hundred twenty-seven patients were included. After correction, there was a significant difference in meeting the optimal outcome when correcting the C2 slope below 10 degrees (85% vs. 34%, P <0.001), along with lower rates of distal junctional failure (DJF) (7% vs. 42%, P <0.001). Next, after isolating patients below the C2 slope threshold, the selection of LIV with an inclination between 0 and 40 degrees demonstrated lower rates of distal junctional kyphosis and higher odds of meeting optimal outcome(OR: 4.2, P =0.011). The best third step was the correction of cSVA below 35 mm. This hierarchical approach (11% of the cohort) led to significantly lower rates of DJF (0% vs. 15%, P <0.007), reoperation (8% vs. 28%, P <0.001), and higher rates of meeting optimal outcome (93% vs. 36%, P <0.001) when controlling for age, comorbidities, and baseline deformity and disability.
CONCLUSION
Our results indicate that the correction of C2 slope should be prioritized during cervical deformity surgery, with the selection of a stable LIV and correction of cervical SVA below the idealized threshold. Among the numerous radiographic parameters considered during preoperative planning for cervical deformity correction, our determinations help surgeons prioritize those realignment strategies that maximize the health-related quality of life outcomes and minimize complications.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE
Level-III.
Identifiants
pubmed: 36920359
doi: 10.1097/BSD.0000000000001442
pii: 01933606-202304000-00005
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
106-111Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2023 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Références
Smith JS, Shaffrey CI, Kim HJ, et al. International Spine Study Group. Prospective multicenter assessment of all-cause mortality following surgery for adult cervical deformity. Neurosurgery. 2018;83:1277–1285.
Jain N, Malik AT, Phillips FM, et al. Degenerative adult cervical kyphosis with secondary diagnosis codes are associated with higher cost and complications after spinal fusion: a medicare database study. Int J Spine Surg. 2021;15:26–36.
Lv B, Fan X, Ding H, et al. Analysis of correlation between age and cervical facet joint degeneration and modic changes in patients with cervical spondylotic myelopathy. Med Sci Monit. 2019;25:7882–7888.
Ames CP, Smith JS, Eastlack R, et al. Reliability assessment of a novel cervical spine deformity classification system. J Neurosurg Spine. 2015;23:673–683.
Pierce KE, Passias PG, Brown AE, et al. International Spine Study Group (ISSG). Prioritization of realignment associated with superior clinical outcomes for cervical deformity patients. Neurospine. 2021;18:506–514.
Virk S, Passias P, Lafage R, et al. Intraoperative alignment goals for distinctive sagittal morphotypes of severe cervical deformity to achieve optimal improvements in health-related quality of life measures. Spine J. 2020;20:1267–1275.
Morse KW, Lafage R, Passias P, et al. International Spine Study Group. A comparison of three different positioning techniques on surgical corrections and postoperative alignment in cervical spinal deformity (CD) surgery. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2021;46:567–570.
Lafage R, Smith JS, Fong AM, et al. International Spine Study Group. Proximal and distal reciprocal changes following cervical deformity malalignment correction. J Neurosurg Spine. 2022:1–8. doi: 10.3171/2022.2.SPINE211316.
doi: 10.3171/2022.2.SPINE211316
Passias PG, Passfall L, Horn SR, et al. International Spine Study Group. Risk-benefit assessment of major versus minor osteotomies for flexible and rigid cervical deformity correction. J Craniovertebr Junction Spine. 2021;12:263–268.
Passias PG, Pierce KE, Imbo B, et al. Cervical and spinopelvic parameters can predict patient reported outcomes following cervical deformity surgery. J Craniovertebr Junction Spine. 2022;13:62–66.Epub 2022 Mar 9.
Passias PG, Pierce KE, Williamson T, et al. Reverse roussouly”: cervicothoracic curvature ratios define characteristic shapes in adult cervical deformity. Eur Spine J. 2022. doi: 10.1007/s00586-022-07225-8.
doi: 10.1007/s00586-022-07225-8
Passias PG, Bortz CA, Segreto FA, et al. Development of a modified cervical deformity frailty index: a streamlined clinical tool for preoperative risk stratification. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2019;44:169–176.
Charlson ME, Pompei P, Ales KL, et al. A new method of classifying prognostic comorbidity in longitudinal studies: development and validation. J Chronic Dis. 1987;40:373–383.
Champain S, Benchikh K, Nogier A, et al. Validation of new clinical quantitative analysis software applicable in spine orthopaedic studies. Eur Spine J. 2006;15:982–991.
Rillardon L, Levassor N, Guigui P, et al. Validation of a tool to measure pelvic and spinal parameters of sagittal balance. Rev Chir Orthop Reparatrice Appar Mot. 2003;89:218–227.
O’Brien MF, Kuklo TRTR, Blanke KM, et al. Spinal deformity study group radiographic measurement manual. Medtronic Sofamor Danek. 2005. http://www.oref.org/docs/default-source/default-document-library/sdsg-radiographic-measuremnt-manual.pdf?sfvrsn=2
Passias PG, Horn SR, Lafage V, et al. International Spine Study Group. Effect of age-adjusted alignment goals and distal inclination angle on the fate of distal junctional kyphosis in cervical deformity surgery. J Craniovertebr Junction Spine. 2021;12:65–71.
Soroceanu A, Smith JS, Lau D, et al. Establishing the minimum clinically important difference in Neck Disability Index and modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association scores for adult cervical deformity. J Neurosurg Spine. 2020:1–5. doi: 10.3171/2020.3.SPINE191232.
doi: 10.3171/2020.3.SPINE191232
Carreon LY, Glassman SD, Campbell MJ, et al. Neck Disability Index, short form-36 physical component summary, and pain scales for neck and arm pain: the minimum clinically important difference and substantial clinical benefit after cervical spine fusion. Spine J. 2010;10:469–474.
Passfall L, Williamson TK, Krol O, et al. Do the newly proposed realignment targets for C2 and T1 slope bridge the gap between radiographic and clinical success in corrective surgery for adult cervical deformity? J Neurosurg Spine. 2022:1–8. doi: 10.3171/2022.2.SPINE211576.
doi: 10.3171/2022.2.SPINE211576
Passias PG, Bortz C, Pierce KE, et al. Appropriate risk stratification and accounting for age-adjusted reciprocal changes in the thoracolumbar spine reduces the incidence and magnitude of distal junctional kyphosis in cervical deformity surgery. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2021;46:1437–1447. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000004033
doi: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000004033
Naessig SN, Ahmad W, Pierce KE, et al. Defining clinically relevant distal failure in the treatment of adult cervical deformity: an improved definition based on functional outcomes and need for reoperation. Spine J. 2021;21:S113–S114.
Protopsaltis TS, Ramchandran S, Tishelman JC, et al. International Spine Study Group. The Importance of C2 slope, a singular marker of cervical deformity, correlates with patient-reported outcomes. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2020;45:184–192.
Kim N, Suk K-S, Kwon J-W, et al. Clinical significance of the C2 slope after multilevel cervical spine fusion. J Neurosurg Spine. 2022;38:24–30.
Lafage R, Line BG, Gupta S, et al. International Spine Study Group (ISSG). Orientation of the Upper-most Instrumented Segment Influences Proximal Junctional Disease Following Adult Spinal Deformity Surgery. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2017;42:1570–1577.
Le Huec JC, Thompson W, Mohsinaly Y, et al. Sagittal balance of the spine. Eur Spine J. 2019;28:1889–1905.
Virk S, Lafage R, Elysee J, et al. The 3 sagittal morphotypes that define the normal cervical spine: a systematic review of the literature and an analysis of asymptomatic volunteers. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2020;102:e109.
Passias PG, Kummer NA, Williamson TK, et al. International Spine Study Group. The additional economic burden of frailty in adult cervical deformity patients undergoing surgical intervention. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2022;47:1418–1425.
Wewel JT, Brahimaj BC, Kasliwal MK, et al. Perioperative complications with multilevel anterior and posterior cervical decompression and fusion. J Neurosurg Spine. 2019:1–6. doi: 10.3171/2019.6.SPINE198.
doi: 10.3171/2019.6.SPINE198
Lau D, Joshi RS, Haddad AF, et al. 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. Neurosurgery. 2022;90:207–214.