Prevalence of Risk Factors for Adverse Spinopelvic Mobility Among Patients Undergoing Total Hip Arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Patients with adverse spinopelvic mobility have higher complication rates following total hip arthroplasty (THA). Risk factors include a stiff lumbar spine, standing posterior pelvic tilt ≤ -10°, and a severe sagittal spinal deformity (pelvic incidence minus lumbar lordosis mismatch ≥20°). The purpose of this study is to define the spinopelvic risk factors and quantify the prevalence of risk factors for pathologic spinopelvic mobility. METHODS: A retrospective cohort analysis from January 2014 to February 2020 was performed on a multicenter series of 9414 primary THAs by 168 surgeons, all with preoperative spinopelvic measurements in the supine, standing, and flex-seated positions. All patients were included. The prevalence of adverse spinopelvic mobility and frequency of each spinopelvic risk factor was calculated. RESULTS: The cohort was 52% female, 48% male, with an average age of 65 years. Thirteen percent of patients exhibited adverse spinopelvic mobility and 17% had one or more of the 3 risk factors. Adverse mobility was found in 35% of patients with at least 1 risk factor, 47% with at least 2 risk factors, and 57% with all 3 risk factors. CONCLUSION: Forty-six percent of patients had spinopelvic pathology driven by one or more of the risk factors. Number of risk factors present and risk of adverse spinopelvic mobility were positively correlated, with 57% of patients with all 3 risk factors exhibiting adverse spinopelvic mobility. Although this study defines the prevalence of these risk factors in this highly selected cohort, it does not report incidence in a general THA population. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic Level IV.

Stiffness After Total Knee Arthroplasty: Is It a Result of Spinal Deformity?

BACKGROUND: There are no studies to date analyzing the effect of spinal malalignment on outcomes of total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Knee flexion is a well-described lower extremity compensatory mechanism for maintaining sagittal balance with increasing spinal deformity. The purpose of this study was to determine whether a subset of patients with poor range of motion (ROM) after TKA have unrecognized spinal deformity, predisposing them to knee flexion contractures and stiffness. METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated a consecutive series of patients who underwent manipulation under anesthesia (MUA) for poor ROM after TKA. Using standing full-length biplanar images, knee alignment and spinopelvic parameters were measured. Patients were stratified by pelvic incidence minus lumbar lordosis as a measure of spinal sagittal alignment with a mismatch of ≥10° defined as abnormal, and we calculated the incidence of sagittal spinal deformity. RESULTS: Average ROM before MUA was extension 3° and flexion 83°. About 62% of patients had a pelvic incidence minus lumbar lordosis mismatch of ≥10°. In the spinal deformity group, post-MUA ROM was improved for flexion only, whereas both flexion and extension were improved in the nondeformity group. CONCLUSION: Compensatory knee flexion because of sagittal spinal deformity may predispose to poor ROM after TKA. Patients with clinical suspicion should be worked up preoperatively and counseled accordingly.

Radiological severity of hip osteoarthritis in patients with adult spinal deformity: the effect on spinopelvic and lower extremity compensatory mechanisms.

PURPOSE: Sagittal spinal deformity (SSD) patients utilize pelvic tilt (PT) and their lower extremities in order to compensate for malalignment. This study examines the effect of hip osteoarthritis (OA) on compensatory mechanisms in SSD patients. METHODS: Patients ≥ 18 years with SSD were included for analysis. Spinopelvic, lower extremity, and cervical alignment were assessed on standing full-body stereoradiographs. Hip OA severity was graded by Kellgren-Lawrence scale (0-4). Patients were categorized as limited osteoarthritis (LOA: grade 0-2) and severe osteoarthritis (SOA: grade 3-4). Patients were matched for age and T1-pelvic angle (TPA). Spinopelvic [sagittal vertical axis (SVA), T1-pelvic angle, thoracic kyphosis (TK), pelvic tilt (PT), lumbar lordosis (LL), pelvic incidence minus lumbar lordosis (PI-LL), T1-spinopelvic inclination (T1SPi)] and lower extremity parameters [sacrofemoral angle, knee angle, ankle angle, posterior pelvic shift (P. Shift), global sagittal axis (GSA)] were compared between groups using independent sample t test. RESULTS: 136 patients (LOA = 68, SOA = 68) were included in the study. SOA had less pelvic tilt (p = 0.011), thoracic kyphosis (p = 0.007), and higher SVA and T1Spi (p < 0.001) than LOA. SOA had lower sacrofemoral angle (p < 0.001) and ankle angle (p = 0.043), increased P. Shift (p < 0.001) and increased GSA (p < 0.001) compared to LOA. There were no differences in PI-LL, LL, knee angle, or cervical alignment (p > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with coexisting spinal malalignment and SOA compensate by pelvic shift and thoracic hypokyphosis rather than PT, likely as a result of limited hip extension secondary to SOA. As a result, SOA had worse global sagittal alignment than their LOA counterparts. These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material.

Bilateral psoas release for long standing hip-spine syndrome: surgical technique and case report.

Background: Severe positive sagittal malalignment can potentially lead to shortening and contracture of the psoas and joint capsule in a flexed spinopelvic position. The utilization of bilateral psoas release to supplement sagittal spinal deformity correction in the same hospitalization was not reported in the literature. Case presentation: A 66-year-old patient presented with a 5-year history of severe global spinal deformity (sagittal vertical axis 220 mm, 60° spinopelvic mismatch) that did not improve on supine radiographs, and a modified Thomas test with more than 30° flexion contracture of bilateral hips. A 3-stage operation utilizing posterior spinal column osteotomies, anterior lumbar interbody fusion, and bilateral psoas releases was performed. Outcome: Her postoperative alignment significantly improved and she was pleased with her new posture and the ability to stand up straight. Conclusions: This report is the first to demonstrate safe and substantial correction of severe spinal deformities associated with bilateral hip flexion contracture in 1 hospitalization.

PROMIS is superior to established outcome measures in capturing disability resulting from sagittal malalignment in patients with back pain.

INTRODUCTION: Patient reported outcomes measurement information system (PROMIS) is a quality of life metric that has gained increased popularity due to computer adaptive testing. Previous studies have shown that PROMIS correlates with Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) in patients with back pain and takes significantly less time to complete. However, the ability of PROMIS to capture disability from spinal malalignment relative to established metrics is unknown. The aim of the present study is to validate the correlation between ODI and PROMIS in patients with back pain, analyze correlations of PROMIS and legacy metrics to sagittal alignment, and identify major drivers of PROMIS scores and ODI in patients with back pain. METHODS: A retrospective review was conducted of a prospectively collected outcome measures database (PROMIS, ODI, VAS Back, VAS Leg, VAS Neck, and VAS Arm) of spine patients > 18 years. Inclusion criteria for the present study was a chief complaint of back pain and full length weight bearing X-rays within 30 days of health related quality of life (HRQL) completion. Demographic information, radiographic alignment, psychiatric diagnoses, and comorbidities were recorded. PROMIS metrics were correlated to legacy metrics (ODI and VAS). Next, outcome metrics were correlated with sagittal alignment variables T1 Pelvic Angle (TPA), SVA, PT, and PI-LL. Patients were grouped based on the presence of spinal deformity (defined radiographically as any one of SVA > 4 cm, PI-LL > 10°, PT > 20°) and mean HRQL scores were investigated for the adult spinal deformity (ASD) and non-ASD groups. Finally, drivers of PROMIS PF scores and ODI scores were determined using multiple stepwise regression. RESULTS: 150 patients met inclusion criteria including 60 patients with ASD and 90 patients without. For the whole cohort, PROMIS PF correlated with ODI (r = - 0.651, p < 0.001), VAS Back (r = - 0.260, p = 0.014) and Charleson Comorbidity Index (r = - 0.336, p < 0.001). PROMIS PF had higher correlations than ODI for each sagittal alignment parameter tested, including TPA, SVA, PT, and PI-LL. When patients with ASD were compared to non-ASD patients, the PROMIS score was different between the groups but the ODI and VAS scores were not. Finally, stepwise linear regression showed that SVA, PI-LL, and VAS Leg were significant drivers of PROMIS PF (r2 = 0.406, p < 0.001). VAS Leg and VAS Back were significant contributors to ODI (r2 = 0.376, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: In a cohort of 150 patients with back pain, PROMIS correlated strongly with legacy outcome metrics, including VAS and ODI. PROMIS PF correlated more strongly with sagittal malalignment than ODI. Additionally, patients with spinal deformity had significantly worse PROMIS PF scores but similar ODI scores as patients without ASD. Finally, sagittal alignment was found to be a significant driver of PROMIS PF scores but not ODI scores. PROMIS PF should be utilized as a disability assessment tool in patients with spinal deformity due to ease of use, strong correlations with legacy metrics, and ability to capture disability resulting from sagittal alignment.