The objective was to describe an intraoperative method that accurately predicts postoperative coronal alignment for up to 2 years of follow-up. The authors hypothesized that the intraoperative coronal target for adult spinal deformity (ASD) surgery should account for lower-extremity parameters, including pelvic obliquity (PO), leg length discrepancy (LLD), lower-extremity mechanical axis difference (MAD), and asymmetrical knee bending.
Two lines were drawn on intraoperative prone radiographs: the central sacral pelvic line (CSPL) (the line bisecting the sacrum and perpendicular to the line touching the acetabular sourcil of both hips) and the intraoperative central sacral vertical line (iCSVL) (which is drawn relative to CSPL based on the preoperative erect PO). The distance from the C7 spinous process to CSPL (C7-CSPL) and the distance from the C7 spinous process to iCSVL (iCVA) were compared with immediate and 2-year postoperative CVA. To account for LLD and preoperative lower-extremity compensation, patients were categorized into four preoperative groups: type 1, no LLD (< 1 cm) and no lower-extremity compensation; type 2, no LLD with lower-extremity compensation (PO > 1°, asymmetrical knee bending, and MAD > 2°); type 3, LLD and no lower-extremity compensation; and type 4, LLD with lower-extremity compensation (asymmetrical knee bending and MAD > 4°). A retrospective review of a consecutively collected cohort with ASD who underwent minimum 6-level fusion with pelvic fixation was performed for validation.
In total, 108 patients (mean ± SD age 57.7 ± 13.7 years, 14.0 ± 3.9 levels fused) were reviewed. Mean preoperative/2-year postoperative CVA was 5.0 ± 2.0/2.2 ± 1.8 cm. For patients with type 1, both C7-CSPL and iCVA had similar error margins for immediate postoperative CVA (0.5 ± 0.6 vs 0.5 ± 0.6 cm, p = 0.900) and 2-year postoperative CVA (0.3 ± 0.4 vs 0.4 ± 0.5 cm, p = 0.185). For patients with type 2, C7-CSPL was more accurate for immediate postoperative CVA (0.8 ± 1.2 vs 1.7 ± 1.8 cm, p = 0.006) and 2-year postoperative CVA (0.7 ± 1.1 vs 2.1 ± 2.2 cm, p < 0.001). For patients with type 3, iCVA was more accurate for immediate postoperative CVA (0.3 ± 0.4 vs 1.7 ± 0.8 cm, p < 0.001) and 2-year postoperative CVA (0.3 ± 0.2 vs 1.9 ± 0.8 cm, p < 0.001). For patients with type 4, iCVA was more accurate for immediate postoperative CVA (0.6 ± 0.7 vs 3.0 ± 1.3 cm, p < 0.001) and 2-year postoperative CVA (0.5 ± 0.6 vs 3.0 ± 1.6 cm, p < 0.001).
This system, which accounted for lower-extremity factors, provided an intraoperative guide to determine both immediate and 2-year postoperative CVA with high accuracy. For patients with type 1 and 2 (no LLD, with or without lower-extremity compensation), C7–intraoperative CSPL accurately predicted postoperative CVA up to 2-year follow-up (mean error 0.5 cm). For patients with type 3 and 4 (LLD, with or without lower-extremity compensation), iCVA accurately predicted postoperative CVA up to 2-year follow-up (mean error 0.4 cm).
INCLUDE WHEN CITINGPublished online May 5, 2023; DOI: 10.3171/2023.3.SPINE221364.
DisclosuresDr. Sardar reported personal fees from Medtronic outside the submitted work. Dr. Lehman reported grants from the National Institute of Health, grants from the Department of Defense, personal fees from Medtronic, personal fees from Pacira, and personal fees from Stryker outside the submitted work. Dr. Lenke reported grants and fellowship support to an institution and reimbursement for airfare/hotel from AO Spine outside the submitted work; consulting fees donated to a charitable foundation and royalties from Medtronic; reimbursement for airfare/hotel from Broadwater; reimbursement for airfare/hotel and grant support paid to an institution from the Scoliosis Research Society; grant support paid to an institution from the Setting Scoliosis Straight Foundation; philanthropic research funding from Evans Family Donation; philanthropic research funding from Fox Family Foundation; consulting fees donated to a charitable foundation and royalties from Acuity Surgical; consulting fees donated to a charitable foundation from Abryx; and grant support paid to an institution from EOS Technology.
BaoH,YanP,QiuY,LiuZ,ZhuF.Coronal imbalance in degenerative lumbar scoliosis: prevalence and influence on surgical decision-making for spinal osteotomy.Bone Joint J.2016;98-B(9):1227-1233.
ZuckermanSL,LaiCS,ShenY,et al.Incidence and risk factors of iatrogenic coronal malalignment after adult spinal deformity surgery: a single-center experience.J Neurosurg Spine.2022;36(4):585–594.
ZuckermanSL,LaiCS,ShenY,et al.Postoperative coronal malalignment after adult spinal deformity surgery: incidence, risk factors, and impact on 2-year outcomes.Spine Deform.2023;11(1):187–196.
TanakaN,EbataS,OdaK,ObaH,HaroH,OhbaT.Predictors and clinical importance of postoperative coronal malalignment after surgery to correct adult spinal deformity.Clin Spine Surg.2020;33(7):E337–E341.
ZhangJ,WangZ,ChiP.Risk factors for immediate postoperative coronal imbalance in degenerative lumbar scoliosis patients fused to pelvis.Global Spine J.2021;11(5):649–655.
WalkerCT,GodzikJ,AngelS,GiraldoJP,TurnerJD,UribeJS.Coronal balance with circumferential minimally invasive spinal deformity surgery for the treatment of degenerative scoliosis: are we leaning in the right direction?J Neurosurg Spine.2021;34(6):879–887.
BuellTJ,SmithJS,ShaffreyCI,et al.Multicenter assessment of surgical outcomes in adult spinal deformity patients with severe global coronal malalignment: determination of target coronal realignment threshold.J Neurosurg Spine.2021;34(3):399–412.
PloumisA,SimpsonAK,ChaTD,HerzogJP,WoodKB.冠状脊柱平衡在成人脊柱畸形tients with long spinal fusions: a minimum 2- to 5-year follow-up study.J Spinal Disord Tech.2015;28(9):341–347.
MerrillRK,KimJS,LevenDM,KimJH,ChoSK.Multi-rodconstructs can prevent rod breakage and pseudarthrosis at the lumbosacral junction in adult spinal deformity.Global Spine J.2017;7(6):514–520.
ZuckermanSL,LaiCS,ShenY,et al.Be prepared: preoperative coronal malalignment often leads to more extensive surgery than sagittal malalignment during adult spinal deformity surgery.Neurospine.2021;18(3):570–579.
ChanbourH,HassanFM,ZuckermanSL,et al.Rod fractures after multi-rod constructs in adult spinal deformity patients fused to the sacrum/pelvis: where do they occur and why?Spine Deform.2023;11(2):471–479.
HaAS,TuchmanA,MatthewJ,et al.Intraoperative versus postoperative radiographic coronal balance for adult spinal deformity surgery.Spine Deform.2021;9(4):1077–1084.
KurraS,MetkarU,YirenkyiH,TallaricoRA,LavelleWF.Assessment of coronal spinal alignment for adult spine deformity cases after intraoperative T square shaped use.Spine Deform.2018;6(3):267–272.
EscottBG,RaviB,WeathermonAC,et al.EOS low-dose radiography: a reliable and accurate upright assessment of lower-limb lengths.J Bone Joint Surg Am.2013;95(23):e1831–e1837.
ParkKR,LeeJH,KimDS,et al.The comparison of lower extremity length and angle between computed radiography-based teleoroentgenogram and EOS®imaging system.Diagnostics (Basel).2022;12(5):1052.
SabharwalS,ZhaoC,McKeonJ,MelaghariT,BlacksinM,WenekorC.Reliability analysis for radiographic measurement of limb length discrepancy: full-length standing anteroposterior radiograph versus scanogram.J Pediatr Orthop.2007;27(1):46–50.
AlfuthM,FichterP,KnickerA.Leg length discrepancy: a systematic review on the validity and reliability of clinical assessments and imaging diagnostics used in clinical practice.PLoS One.2021;16(12):e0261457.
SabharwalS,KumarA.Methods for assessing leg length discrepancy.Clin Orthop Relat Res.2008;466(12):2910–2922.
LuoCF.Reference axes for reconstruction of the knee.Knee.2004;11(4):251–257.
PlaisN,BaoH,LafageR,et al.The clinical impact of global coronal malalignment is underestimated in adult patients with thoracolumbar scoliosis.Spine Deform.2020;8(1):105–113.
BuellTJ,SmithJS.Adult spinal deformity and novel classifications: is coronal malalignment making a comeback?: Commentary on "Obeid-Coronal Malalignment Classification Is Age Related and Independently Associated to Personal Reported Outcome Measurement Scores in the Nonfused Spine".Neurospine.2021;18(3):481–483.
ZuckermanSL,CerpaM,LaiCS,LenkeLG.Coronal alignment in adult spinal deformity surgery: definitions, measurements, treatment algorithms, and impact on clinical outcomes.Clin Spine Surg.2022;35(5):196–203.
ZuckermanSL,ChanbourH,HassanFM,et al.Patients with coronal malalignment undergoing adult spinal deformity surgery: does coronal alignment change from immediately postoperative to 2-years?Clin Spine Surg.2023;36(1):E14灯头–E21.
ObeidI,BerjanoP,LamartinaC,ChopinD,BoissièreL,BourghliA.Classification of coronal imbalance in adult scoliosis and spine deformity: a treatment-oriented guideline.Eur Spine J.2019;28(1):94–113.
HayashiK,BoissièreL,CawleyDT,et al.一个新的冠状malalignme分类nt in adult spinal deformity: a validation and the role of lateral bending radiographs.Eur Spine J.2020;29(9):2287–2294.
KnutsonGA.Anatomic and functional leg-length inequality: a review and recommendation for clinical decision-making. Part I, anatomic leg-length inequality: prevalence, magnitude, effects and clinical significance.Chiropr Osteopat.2005;13:11.
HarveyWF,YangM,CookeTD,et al.Association of leg-length inequality with knee osteoarthritis: a cohort study.Ann Intern Med.2010;152(5):287–295.
MoseleyCF.Leg length discrepancy.Orthop Clin North Am.1987;18(4):529–535.
HamadMN,LivshetzI,SoodA,PatettaM,GonzalezMH,AmiroucheFA.Effects of pelvic obliquity and limb position on radiographic leg length discrepancy measurement: a Sawbones model.J Exp Orthop.2022;9(1):71.
ZuckermanSL,LaiCS,ShenY,et al.Understanding the role of pelvic obliquity and leg length discrepancy in adult spinal deformity patients with coronal malalignment: unlocking the black box.J Neurosurg Spine.2022;37(1):64–72.
RaczkowskiJW,DaniszewskaB,ZolynskiK.Functional scoliosis caused by leg length discrepancy.Arch Med Sci.2010;6(3):393–398.
FerreroE,LiabaudB,ChallierV,et al.Role of pelvic translation and lower-extremity compensation to maintain gravity line position in spinal deformity.J Neurosurg Spine.2016;24(3):436–446.
DieboBG,OrenJH,ChallierV,et al.Global sagittal axis: a step toward full-body assessment of sagittal plane deformity in the human body.J Neurosurg Spine.2016;25(4):494–499.
ShuS,HuZ,BaoH,et al.An analysis of the interactions between the spine, pelvis, and lower limbs in asymptomatic adults with limited pelvic compensation.Quant Imaging Med Surg.2020;10(5):999–1007.
WadeR,YangH,McKennaC,FariaR,GummersonN,WoolacottN.A systematic review of the clinical effectiveness of EOS 2D/3D X-ray imaging system.Eur Spine J.2013;22(2):296–304.
All Time | Past Year | Past 30 Days | |
---|---|---|---|
Abstract Views | 460 | 460 | 69 |
Full Text Views | 110 | 110 | 32 |
PDF Downloads | 143 | 143 | 52 |
EPUB Downloads | 0 | 0 | 0 |