» Articles » PMID: 37310045

Outcomes and Reoperation Rates of Adult Spinal Deformity Patients with Baseline Sagittal Malalignment Based on the Cranial Axis to the Hip at 2 Years Postoperatively

Overview
Date 2023 Jun 13
PMID 37310045
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Objective: The aim of this study was to discern whether patients with a cranial sagittal vertical axis to the hip (CrSVA-H) > 2 cm at 2 years postoperatively exhibit significantly worse patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and clinical outcomes compared with patients with CrSVA-H < 2 cm.

Methods: This was a retrospective, 1:1 propensity score-matched (PSM) study of patients who underwent posterior spinal fusion for adult spinal deformity. All patients had a baseline sagittal imbalance of CrSVA-H > 30 mm. Two-year patient-reported and clinical outcomes were assessed in unmatched and PSM cohorts, including Scoliosis Research Society-22r (SRS-22r) and Oswestry Disability Index scores as well as reoperation rates. The study compared two cohorts based on 2-year alignment: CrSVA-H < 20 mm (aligned cohort) vs CrSVA-H > 20 mm (malaligned cohort). For the matched cohorts, binary outcome comparisons were carried out using the McNemar test, while continuous outcomes used the Wilcoxon rank-sum test. For unmatched cohorts, categorical variables were compared using chi-square/Fisher's tests, while continuous outcomes were compared using Welch's t-test.

Results: A total of 156 patients with mean age of 63.7 (SEM 1.09) years underwent posterior spinal fusion spanning a mean of 13.5 (0.32) levels. At baseline, the mean pelvic incidence minus lumbar lordosis mismatch was 19.1° (2.01°), the T1 pelvic angle was 26.6° (1.20°), and the CrSVA-H was 74.9 (4.33) mm. The mean CrSVA-H improved from 74.9 mm to 29.2 mm (p < 0.0001). At the 2-year follow-up, 129 (78%) of 164 patients achieved CrSVA-H < 2 cm (aligned cohort). Patients who had CrSVA-H > 2 cm (malaligned cohort) at the 2-year follow-up had worse preoperative CrSVA-H (p < 0.0001). After performing PSM, 27 matched pairs were generated. In the PSM cohort, the aligned and malaligned cohorts demonstrated comparable preoperative patient-reported outcomes (PROs). However, at the 2-year postoperative follow-up, the malaligned cohort reported worse outcomes in SRS-22r function (p = 0.0275), pain (p = 0.0012), and mean total score (p = 0.0109). Moreover, when patients were stratified based on their magnitude of improvement in CrSVA-H (< 50% vs > 50%), patients with > 50% improvement in CrSVA-H had superior outcomes in SRS-22r function (p = 0.0336), pain (p = 0.0446), and mean total score (p = 0.0416). Finally, patients in the malaligned cohort had a higher 2-year reoperation rate (22% vs 7%; p = 0.0412) compared with patients in the aligned cohort.

Conclusions: Among patients who present with forward sagittal imbalance (CrSVA-H > 30 mm), patients with CrSVA-H exceeding 20 mm at the 2-year postoperative follow-up have inferior PROs and higher reoperation rates.

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.


The more the better? Integration of vertebral pelvic angles (VPA) PJK thresholds to existing alignment schemas for prevention of mechanical complications after adult spinal deformity surgery.

Das A, Onafowokan O, Mir J, Lafage R, Lafage V, Passias P Eur Spine J. 2024; 33(10):3887-3893.

PMID: 39222081 DOI: 10.1007/s00586-024-08458-5.


Knee flexion compensation in postoperative adult spinal deformity patients: implications for sagittal balance and clinical outcomes.

Mohanty S, Lai C, Greisberg G, Hassan F, Mikhail C, Stephan S Spine Deform. 2024; 12(3):785-799.

PMID: 38340228 DOI: 10.1007/s43390-024-00824-z.


Narrative Review of Clinical Impact of Head-Hip Offset Following Adult Spinal Deformity Surgery.

Kim S, Hyun S, Lee J, Kim K J Korean Neurosurg Soc. 2023; 67(2):137-145.

PMID: 37752818 PMC: 10924913. DOI: 10.3340/jkns.2023.0168.