Computerized Preoperative Planning for Correction of Sagittal Deformity of the Spine

Overview

Journal Surg Radiol Anat

Specialties Anatomy & Histology
General Surgery
Radiology

Date 2009 Jul 15

PMID 19597753

Citations 25

Authors

Nicolas Aurouer

Ibrahim Obeid

Olivier Gille

Vincent Pointillart

Jean-Marc Vital

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Purpose: Various methods of preoperative planning have been described for the correction of spinal sagittal deformities. They are reliable on condition that the thoracolumbar spine is totally fused and enable only the simulation of pedicle subtraction osteotomy (PSO). In this study, a new theoretical planning that can be used regardless of the etiology of the deformity and the type of osteotomy is described and assessed.

Methods: The spino-pelvic sagittal balance can be expressed by two parameters: pelvic tilt (PT) and center of both acoustic meati (CAM) overhang. These two parameters vary according to the type, number, level, and angulation of osteotomies. The general principle of the planning is to define the surgical program in order to obtain PT and CAM overhang as close as possible to the normal values. The theoretical planning is based on a trigonometric construction which depends on numerous factors and is challenging to use in daily practice without the aid of a software tool. Modifications are proposed if the spine cannot be modeled as a solid beam due to unfused disks allowing relative motion. The SpineView software, which enables analysis and quick visualization of different correction possibilities, is presented. The planning method is assessed in a prospective cohort of 11 patients by comparing planned values of spino-pelvic parameters to postoperative values.

Results: In all, 8 preoperative plans out of 11 were concordant with the postoperative results.

Conclusions: The preoperative planning enables the surgeon to estimate the clinical effects of the different surgical techniques in order to choose the best procedure for a given patient.

Citing Articles

Does sagittal alignment after spinal reconstruction following en bloc tumor resection impact revision rate? A preliminary long-term retrospective study.

Cecchinato R, Compagnone D, Verlaan J, Dea N, Niu T, Pezzi A Eur Spine J. 2025; .

PMID: 40087155 DOI: 10.1007/s00586-025-08789-x.

A posterior trans-intervertebral osteotomy with anterior support for kyphosis deformity secondary to ankylosing spondylitis: a technical note.

Ding Z, Wang Y, Kang N, Hai Y, Zhou L BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2025; 26(1):2.

PMID: 39743521 PMC: 11694459. DOI: 10.1186/s12891-024-08260-w.

Evaluation of preoperative calculation methods of osteotomy size in ankylosing spondylitis with thoracolumbar or lumbar kyphosis.

Cheng J, Zhang S, Sheng W BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2022; 23(1):1076.

PMID: 36482380 PMC: 9733216. DOI: 10.1186/s12891-022-06043-9.

Sagittal Parameters of Spine-Pelvis-Hip Joints in Patients with Lumbar Spinal Stenosis.

Xu S, Guo C, Liang Y, Zhu Z, Liu H Orthop Surg. 2022; 14(11):2854-2862.

PMID: 36125192 PMC: 9627079. DOI: 10.1111/os.13467.

Sagittal balance: from theory to clinical practice.

Cirillo Totera J, Fleiderman Valenzuela J, Garrido Arancibia J, Pantoja Contreras S, Lalanne L, Alvarez-Lemos F EFORT Open Rev. 2022; 6(12):1193-1202.

PMID: 35839102 PMC: 8693232. DOI: 10.1302/2058-5241.6.210062.

References

van Royen B, De Gast A, Smit T . Deformity planning for sagittal plane corrective osteotomies of the spine in ankylosing spondylitis. Eur Spine J. 2001; 9(6):492-8. PMC: 3611428. DOI: 10.1007/s005860000183. View

Ondra S, Marzouk S, Koski T, Silva F, Salehi S . Mathematical calculation of pedicle subtraction osteotomy size to allow precision correction of fixed sagittal deformity. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2006; 31(25):E973-9. DOI: 10.1097/01.brs.0000247950.02886.e5. View

Gangnet N, Pomero V, Dumas R, Skalli W, Vital J . Variability of the spine and pelvis location with respect to the gravity line: a three-dimensional stereoradiographic study using a force platform. Surg Radiol Anat. 2003; 25(5-6):424-33. DOI: 10.1007/s00276-003-0154-6. View

van Royen B, Toussaint H, Kingma I, Bot S, Caspers M, Harlaar J . Accuracy of the sagittal vertical axis in a standing lateral radiograph as a measurement of balance in spinal deformities. Eur Spine J. 1998; 7(5):408-12. PMC: 3611289. DOI: 10.1007/s005860050098. View

Pigge R, Scheerder F, Smit T, Mullender M, van Royen B . Effectiveness of preoperative planning in the restoration of balance and view in ankylosing spondylitis. Neurosurg Focus. 2008; 24(1):E7. DOI: 10.3171/FOC/2008/24/1/E7. View

Boulay C, Tardieu C, Hecquet J, Benaim C, Mouilleseaux B, Marty C . Sagittal alignment of spine and pelvis regulated by pelvic incidence: standard values and prediction of lordosis. Eur Spine J. 2005; 15(4):415-22. PMC: 3489325. DOI: 10.1007/s00586-005-0984-5. View

Yang B, Ondra S . A method for calculating the exact angle required during pedicle subtraction osteotomy for fixed sagittal deformity: comparison with the trigonometric method. Neurosurgery. 2006; 59(4 Suppl 2):ONS458-63. DOI: 10.1227/01.NEU.0000232628.46247.15. View

Champain S, Benchikh K, Nogier A, Mazel C, Guise J, Skalli W . Validation of new clinical quantitative analysis software applicable in spine orthopaedic studies. Eur Spine J. 2005; 15(6):982-91. PMC: 3489429. DOI: 10.1007/s00586-005-0927-1. View

Gelb D, Lenke L, Bridwell K, Blanke K, McEnery K . An analysis of sagittal spinal alignment in 100 asymptomatic middle and older aged volunteers. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1995; 20(12):1351-8. View

10.

van Royen B, Scheerder F, Jansen E, Smit T . ASKyphoplan: a program for deformity planning in ankylosing spondylitis. Eur Spine J. 2007; 16(9):1445-9. PMC: 2200734. DOI: 10.1007/s00586-007-0371-5. View

11.

Glassman S, Bridwell K, Dimar J, Horton W, Berven S, Schwab F . The impact of positive sagittal balance in adult spinal deformity. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2005; 30(18):2024-9. DOI: 10.1097/01.brs.0000179086.30449.96. View

12.

Mangione P, Senegas J . [Sagittal balance of the spine]. Rev Chir Orthop Reparatrice Appar Mot. 1997; 83(1):22-32. View

13.

Rajnics P, Pomero V, Templier A, Lavaste F, Illes T . Computer-assisted assessment of spinal sagittal plane radiographs. J Spinal Disord. 2001; 14(2):135-42. DOI: 10.1097/00002517-200104000-00008. View

14.

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):260-7. DOI: 10.2106/JBJS.D.02043. View

15.

Lazennec J, Ramare S, Arafati N, Laudet C, Gorin M, Roger B . Sagittal alignment in lumbosacral fusion: relations between radiological parameters and pain. Eur Spine J. 2000; 9(1):47-55. PMC: 3611353. DOI: 10.1007/s005860050008. View

16.

Jackson R, Hales C . Congruent spinopelvic alignment on standing lateral radiographs of adult volunteers. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2000; 25(21):2808-15. DOI: 10.1097/00007632-200011010-00014. View

17.

Bridwell K . Decision making regarding Smith-Petersen vs. pedicle subtraction osteotomy vs. vertebral column resection for spinal deformity. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2006; 31(19 Suppl):S171-8. DOI: 10.1097/01.brs.0000231963.72810.38. View

18.

Ruf M, Wagner R, Merk H, Harms J . [Preoperative planning and computer assisted surgery in ankylosing spondylitis]. Z Orthop Ihre Grenzgeb. 2006; 144(1):52-7. DOI: 10.1055/s-2006-921484. View

19.

Legaye J, Duval-Beaupere 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):99-103. PMC: 3611230. DOI: 10.1007/s005860050038. View

20.

Horton W, Brown C, Bridwell K, Glassman S, Suk S, Cha C . 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):427-33. DOI: 10.1097/01.brs.0000153698.94091.f8. View