Cervical, Thoracic, and Spinopelvic Compensation After Proximal Junctional Kyphosis (PJK): Does Location of PJK Matter?

Study Design:Retrospective case series. Objective:Compensatory changes above a proximal junctional kyphosis (PJK) have not been defined. Understanding these mechanisms may help determine optimal level selection when performing revision for PJK. This study investigates how varying PJK location changes proximal spinal alignment. Methods:Patients were grouped by upper instrumented vertebrae (UIV): lower thoracic (LT; T8-L1) or upper thoracic (UT; T1-7). Alignment parameters were compared. Correlation analysis was performed between PJK magnitude and global/cervical alignment. Results:A total of 369 patients were included; mean age of 63 years, body mass index 28, and 81% female, LT (n = 193) versus UT (n = 176). The rate of radiographic PJK was 49%, higher in the LT group (55% vs 42%, P = .01). The UT group displayed significant differences in all cervical radiographic parameters (P < .05) between PJK versus non-PJK patients, while the LT group displayed significant differences in T1S and C2-T3 sagittal vertical axis (SVA) (CTS). In comparing UT versus LT patients, UT had more posterior global alignment (smaller TPA [T1 pelvic angle], SVA, and larger PT [pelvic tilt]) and larger anterior cervical alignment (greater cSVA [cervical SVA], T1S-CL [T1 slope-cervical lordosis] mismatch, CTS) compared to LT. Correlation analysis of PJK magnitude and location demonstrated a correlation with increases in CL, T1S, and CTS in the UT group. In the LT group, PT increased with PJK angle (r = 0.17) and no significant correlations were noted to SVA, cSVA, or T1S-CL. Conclusions:PJK location influences compensation mechanisms of the cervical and thoracic spine. LT PJK results in increased PT and CL with decreased CTS. UT PJK increases CL to counter increases in T1S with continued T1S-CL mismatch and elevated cSVA

The Health Impact of Symptomatic Adult Spinal Deformity: Comparison of Deformity Types to United States Population Norms and Chronic Diseases.

Study designA retrospective analysis of a prospective, multicenter database.ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to evaluate the health impact of symptomatic adult spinal deformity (SASD) by comparing Standard Form Version 2 (SF-36) scores for SASD with United States normative and chronic disease values.Summary of background dataRecent data have identified radiographic parameters correlating with poor health-related quality of life for SASD. Disability comparisons between SASD patients and patients with chronic diseases may provide further insight to the disease burden caused by SASD.MethodsConsecutive SASD patients, with no history of spine surgery, were enrolled into a multicenter database and evaluated for type and severity of spinal deformity. Baseline SF-36 physical component summary (PCS) and mental component summary (MCS) values for SASD patients were compared with reported U.S. normative and chronic disease SF-36 scores. SF-36 scores were reported as normative-based scores (NBS) and evaluated for minimally clinical important difference (MCID).ResultsBetween 2008 and 2011, 497 SASD patients were prospectively enrolled and evaluated. Mean PCS for all SASD was lower than U.S. total population (ASD = 40.9; US = 50; P < 0.05). Generational decline in PCS for SASD patients with no other reported comorbidities was more rapid than U.S. norms (P < 0.05). PCS worsened with lumbar scoliosis and increasing sagittal vertical axis (SVA). PCS scores for patients with isolated thoracic scoliosis were similar to values reported by individuals with chronic back pain (45.5 vs 45.7, respectively; P > 0.05), whereas patients with lumbar scoliosis combined with severe sagittal malalignment (SVA >10 cm) demonstrated worse PCS scores than values reported by patients with limited use of arms and legs (24.7 vs 29.1, respectively; P < 0.05).ConclusionsSASD is a heterogeneous condition that, depending upon the type and severity of the deformity, can have a debilitating impact on health often exceeding the disability of more recognized chronic diseases. Health care providers must be aware of the types of SASD that correlate with disability to facilitate appropriate diagnosis, treatment, and research efforts.Level of evidence3

Acute Reciprocal Changes Distant from the Site of Spinal Osteotomies Affect Global Postoperative Alignment

Introduction. Three-column vertebral resections are frequently applied to correct sagittal malalignment; their effects on distant unfused levels need to be understood. Methods. 134 consecutive adult PSO patients were included (29 thoracic, 105 lumbar). Radiographic analysis included pre- and postoperative regional curvatures and pelvic parameters, with paired independent t-tests to evaluate changes. Results. A thoracic osteotomy with limited fusion leads to a correction of the kyphosis and to a spontaneous decrease of the unfused lumbar lordosis (−8°). When the fusion was extended, the lumbar lordosis increased (+8°). A lumbar osteotomy with limited fusion leads to a correction of the lumbar lordosis and to a spontaneous increase of the unfused thoracic kyphosis (+13°). When the fusion was extended, the thoracic kyphosis increased by 6°. Conclusion. Data from this study suggest that lumbar and thoracic resection leads to reciprocal changes in unfused segments and requires consideration beyond focal corrections

Unsupervised Clustering of Adult Spinal Deformity Patterns Predicts Surgical and Patient-Reported Outcomes.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate whether different radiographic clusters of adult spinal deformity identified using artificial intelligence-based clustering are associated with distinct surgical outcomes. METHODS: Patients were classified based on the results of a previously conducted analysis that examined clusters of deformity, including Moderate Sagittal (Mod Sag), Severe Sagittal (Sev Sag), Coronal, and Hyper-Thoracic Kyphosis (Hyper-TK). The surgical data, HRQOL, and complication outcomes of these clusters were then compared. RESULTS: The final analysis included 1062 patients. Similar to published results on a different patient sample, Mod Sag and Sev Sag patients were older, more likely to have a history of previous spine surgery, and more disabled. By 2-year, all clusters improved in HRQOL and reached a similar rate of minimal clinically important difference (MCID).The Sev Sag cluster had the highest rate major complications (53% vs 34-40%), and complications leading to reoperation (29% vs 17-23%), implant failures (20% vs 8-11%), and operative complications (27% vs 10-17%). Coronal patients had the highest rate of pulmonary complications (9% vs 3-6%) but the lowest rate of X-ray imbalance (10% vs 19-21%). No significant differences were found in neurological complications, infection rate, gastrointestinal, or cardiac events (all P > .1). Kaplan-Meier survival curves demonstrated a lower time to first complications for the Sev Sag cluster. CONCLUSIONS: All clusters of adult spinal deformity benefit similarly from surgery as they all achieved similar rates of MCID. Although the rates of complications varied among the clusters, the types of complications were not significantly different

The ISSG-AO Complication Intervention Score, but Not Major/Minor Designation, is Correlated With Length of Stay Following Adult Spinal Deformity Surgery.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective review. OBJECTIVES: The International Spine Study Group-AO (ISSG-AO) Adult Spinal Deformity (ASD) Complication Classification System was developed to improve classification, reporting, and study of complications among patients undergoing ASD surgery. The ISSG-AO system classifies interventions to address complications by level of invasiveness: grade zero (none); grade 1, mild (e.g., medication change); grade 2, moderate (e.g., ICU admission); grade 3, severe (e.g., reoperation related to surgery of interest). To evaluate the efficacy of the ISSG-AO ASD Complication Classification System, we aimed to compare correlations between postoperative length of stay (LOS) and complication severity as classified by the ISSG-AO ASD and traditional major/minor complication classification systems. METHODS: Patients age ≥18 in a multicenter ASD database who sustained in-hospital complications were identified. Complications were classified with the major/minor and ISSG-AO systems and correlated with LOS using an ensemble-based machine learning algorithm (conditional random forest) and a generalized linear mixed model. RESULTS: 490 patients at 19 sites were included. 64.9% of complications were major, and 35.1% were minor. By ISSG-AO classification, 20.4%, 66.1%, 6.7%, and 6.7% were grades 0-3, respectively. ISSG-AO complication grading demonstrated significant correlation with LOS, whereas major/minor complication classification demonstrated inverse correlation with LOS. In conditional random forest analysis, ISSG-AO classification had the greatest relative importance when assessing correlations across multiple variables with LOS. CONCLUSIONS: The ISSG-AO system may help identify specific complications associated with prolonged LOS. Targeted interventions to avoid or reduce these complications may improve ASD surgical quality and resource utilization

Comparison of Best Versus Worst Clinical Outcomes for Adult Cervical Deformity Surgery.

Study Design: Retrospective cohort study. Objective: Factors that predict outcomes for adult cervical spine deformity (ACSD) have not been well defined. To compare ACSD patients with best versus worst outcomes. Methods: This study was based on a prospective, multicenter observational ACSD cohort. Best versus worst outcomes were compared based on Neck Disability Index (NDI), Neck Pain Numeric Rating Scale (NP-NRS), and modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association (mJOA) scores. Results: Of 111 patients, 80 (72%) had minimum 1-year follow-up. For NDI, compared with best outcome patients (n = 28), worst outcome patients (n = 32) were more likely to have had a major complication ( Conclusions: Factors distinguishing best and worst ACSD surgery outcomes included patient, surgical, and radiographic factors. These findings suggest areas that may warrant greater awareness to optimize patient counseling and outcomes

How Good Are Surgeons at Achieving Their Preoperative Goal Sagittal Alignment Following Adult Deformity Surgery?

STUDY DESIGN: Multicenter, prospective cohort. OBJECTIVES: Malalignment following adult spine deformity (ASD) surgery can impact outcomes and increase mechanical complications. We assess whether preoperative goals for sagittal alignment following ASD surgery are achieved. METHODS: ASD patients were prospectively enrolled based on 3 criteria: deformity severity (PI-LL ≥25°, TPA ≥30°, SVA ≥15 cm, TCobb≥70° or TLCobb≥50°), procedure complexity (≥12 levels fused, 3-CO or ACR) and/or age (>65 and ≥7 levels fused). The surgeon documented sagittal alignment goals prior to surgery. Goals were compared with achieved alignment on first follow-up standing radiographs. RESULTS: The 266 enrolled patients had a mean age of 61.0 years (SD = 14.6) and 68% were women. Mean instrumented levels was 13.6 (SD = 3.8), and 23.2% had a 3-CO. Mean (SD) offsets (achieved-goal) were: SVA = -8.5 mm (45.6 mm), PI-LL = -4.6° (14.6°), TK = 7.2° (14.7°), reflecting tendencies to undercorrect SVA and PI-LL and increase TK. Goals were achieved for SVA, PI-LL, and TK in 74.4%, 71.4%, and 68.8% of patients, respectively, and was achieved for all 3 parameters in 37.2% of patients. Three factors were independently associated with achievement of all 3 alignment goals: use of PACs/equivalent for surgical planning (P < .001), lower baseline GCA (P = .009), and surgery not including a 3-CO (P = .037). CONCLUSIONS: Surgeons failed to achieve goal alignment of each sagittal parameter in ∼25-30% of ASD patients. Goal alignment for all 3 parameters was only achieved in 37.2% of patients. Those at greatest risk were patients with more severe deformity. Advancements are needed to enable more consistent translation of preoperative alignment goals to the operating room

Cost-utility of revisions for cervical deformity correction warrants minimization of reoperations.

Background: Cervical deformity (CD) surgery has become increasingly more common and complex, which has also led to reoperations for complications such as distal junctional kyphosis (DJK). Cost-utility analysis has yet to be used to analyze CD revision surgery in relation to the cost-utility of primary CD surgeries. The aim of this study was to determine the cost-utility of revision surgery for CD correction. Methods: Retrospective review of a multicenter prospective CD database. CD was defined as at least one of the following: C2-C7 Cobb \u3e10°, cervical lordosis (CL) \u3e10°, cervical sagittal vertical axis (cSVA) \u3e4 cm, chin-brow vertical angle (CBVA) \u3e25°. Quality-adjusted life year (QALY) were calculated by EuroQol Five-Dimensions questionnaire (EQ-5D) and Neck Disability Index (NDI) mapped to SF-6D index and utilized a 3% discount rate to account for residual decline to life expectancy (men: 76.9 years, women: 81.6 years). Medicare reimbursement at 30 days assigned costs for index procedures (9+ level posterior fusion, 4-8 level posterior fusion with anterior fusion, 2-3 level posterior fusion with anterior fusion, 4-8 level anterior fusion) and revision fusions (2-3 level, 4-8 level, or 9+ level posterior refusion). Cost per QALY gained was calculated. Results: Eighty-nine CD patients were included (61.6 years, 65.2% female). CD correction for these patients involved a mean 7.7±3.7 levels fused, with 34% combined approach surgeries, 49% posterior-only and 17% anterior-only, 19.1% three-column osteotomy. Costs for index surgeries ranged from $20,001-55,205, with the average cost for this cohort of$44,318 and cost per QALY of $27,267. Eleven revision surgeries (mean levels fused 10.3) occurred up to 1-year, with an average cost of$41,510. Indications for revisions were DJK (5/11), neurologic impairment [4], infection [1], prominent/painful instrumentation [1]. Average QALYs gained was 1.62 per revision patient. Cost was $28,138 per QALY for reoperations. Conclusions: CD revisions had a cost of$28,138 per QALY, in addition to the $27,267 per QALY for primary CD surgeries. For primary CD patients, CD surgery has the potential to be cost effective, with the caveats that a patient livelihood extends long enough to have the benefits and durability of the surgery is maintained. Efforts in research and surgical technique development should emphasize minimization of reoperation causes just as DJK that significantly affect cost utility of these surgeries to bring cost-utility to an acceptable range

Are We Focused on the Wrong Early Postoperative Quality Metrics? Optimal Realignment Outweighs Perioperative Risk in Adult Spinal Deformity Surgery

BACKGROUND: While reimbursement is centered on 90-day outcomes, many patients may still achieve optimal, long-term outcomes following adult spinal deformity (ASD) surgery despite transient short-term complications. OBJECTIVE: Compare long-term clinical success and cost-utility between patients achieving optimal realignment and suboptimally aligned peers. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: Retrospective cohort study of a prospectively collected multicenter database. METHODS: ASD patients with two-year (2Y) data included. Groups were propensity score matched (PSM) for age, frailty, body mass index (BMI), Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI), and baseline deformity. Optimal radiographic criteria are defined as meeting low deformity in all three (Scoliosis Research Society) SRS-Schwab parameters or being proportioned in Global Alignment and Proportionality (GAP). Cost-per-QALY was calculated for each time point. Multivariable logistic regression analysis and ANCOVA (analysis of covariance) adjusting for baseline disability and deformity (pelvic incidence (PI), pelvic incidence minus lumbar lordosis (PI-LL)) were used to determine the significance of surgical details, complications, clinical outcomes, and cost-utility. RESULTS: A total of 930 patients were considered. Following PSM, 253 optimal (O) and 253 not optimal (NO) patients were assessed. The O group underwent more invasive procedures and had more levels fused. Analysis of complications by two years showed that the O group suffered less overall major (38% vs. 52%, CONCLUSIONS: Fewer late complications (mechanical and reoperations) are seen in optimally aligned patients, leading to better long-term cost-utility overall. Therefore, the current focus on avoiding short-term complications may be counterproductive, as achieving optimal surgical correction is critical for long-term success