Static and dynamic sagittal lumbar apex: a new concept for the assessment of lumbar lordosis distribution in spinal deformity.

PURPOSE: Sagittal lumbar apex has been demonstrated to be a key parameter in sagittal plane morphology. Our aim was to understand its behavior with postural changes, analyzing two different concepts of lumbar apex. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Prospective observational study with a cohort of patients presenting sagittal malalignment identified from a monocenter database of adult spinal deformities (ASD). Inclusion criteria were age > 30 years, SVA > 40 mm, and/or PT > 20. All patients had full-spine EOS radiographs in 2 different positions: (P1: natural position) and position 2 (P2: compensated position). Sagittal alignment, spinopelvic values, and two different methods of assessing lordosis apex location were analyzed in both P1 and P2 positions. Changes between P1 and P2 were compared using a paired t test with a significance level at p < 0.05. RESULTS: Twenty-five patients were recruited (21 women and 4 men). The mean age was 64.8 years (range 21-79). The patient's main compensation was based on an increase in the femoral shaft angle, and pelvic retroversion, with a subsequent decrease in sacral slope, and therefore of the lower lumbar arc. When the lumbar apex was calculated as the most anterior point touching the vertical line in a lateral radiograph, postural compensation changes modified its location usually shifting it to a more caudal position. When the lumbar apex was assessed as the most distant point of the global lumbar lordosis, its position remained stable regardless of compensation. CONCLUSIONS: Postural changes can modify the location of the lumbar apex when understanding its location as the cornerstone of sagittal plane harmonic distribution. This concept can be useful as an additional sign to assess compensation. However, if the lumbar apex was calculated as the angular point of the global lordosis, its position remained stable regardless of postural changes. This concept can help to mold lumbar lordosis in ASD surgery. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE IV: Diagnostic: individual cross-sectional studies with consistently applied reference standard and blinding.

New Onset Sacroiliac Joint Pain After Transforaminal Interbody Fusion: What Are the Culprits?

STUDY DESIGN: A retrospective case-control study. OBJECTIVE: Only a few studies have studied the incidence of new-onset SI joint pain following lumbar spine fusion surgery. We aimed to explore the association between new-onset SI joint pain following Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion (TLIF) for degenerative spine disorders and changes in spinopelvic parameters. METHODS: A retrospective review of hospital records and imaging database of a tertiary care institute was done for patients who underwent TLIF from October 2018 to October 2019. The 354 patients who satisfied the eligibility criteria were divided into 2 groups(Group A, new-onset SI joint pain group, n = 34 and Group B, normal controls, n = 320). Symptomatic relief (>70% reduction in the VAS [Visual Analogue Scale] score) after 15 minutes of SI joint injection was considered diagnostic of SI joint pain. Clinical and radiological spinopelvic parameters were compared between the 2 groups. RESULTS: Patients with postoperative SI joint pain (Group A) had significantly less preoperative and postoperative lumbar lordosis (p < 0.001) compared to the other group. Most of the patients in Group A had a cephalad migration of the apex postoperatively (30/34 patients) whereas majority of patients in group B had either predominant caudal migration (44/320 patients) or no migration of the lumbar apex (272/320 patients). CONCLUSIONS: The preoperative and postoperative lumbar lordosis are significantly less and the postoperative pelvic tilt is significantly high in patients with new-onset SI joint pain compared to the control group. The cephalad migration of the lumbar apex is significantly associated with new-onset SI joint pain.

Morphological description of sagittal lumbar spinal alignment using curve magnitude, span, and apex-the multiethnic alignment normative study (MEANS).

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Current definition of lumbar lordosis uses the L1-S1 angle. Prevailing classification of sagittal spinal morphology, derived from a young adult population, classifies the spine into four subtypes defined by their sacral slope (SS) and curve morphology. PURPOSE: To describe physiological sagittal alignment of the lumbar spine across age groups using three main parameters that dictate the lumbar curve: angular magnitude, span, and apex. STUDY DESIGN: A large, multicenter, cross-sectional radiographic comparison study. PATIENT SAMPLE: Four hundred sixty-eight healthy, asymptomatic subjects aged 18 to 80 years from five countries (184 males, 284 females; 98 France, 119 Japan, 79 Singapore, 80 Tunisia, 92 USA, mean age 40.61±14.99 years). OUTCOME MEASURES: Sagittal lumbar profile subtypes clustered based on lumbar curve angular magnitude (ie, Cobb angle of the lumbar lordosis), span, and apex, and described by sagittal radiographic parameters. METHODS: Subjects underwent whole-body low-dose EOS stereoradiographs. Comparisons between conventional L1-S1 lumbar lordosis (cLL) and true lumbar lordosis (tLL, defined by the inflection-S1 angle) were conducted. Using the K-means clustering algorithm, lumbar curve angular magnitude, span and apex were used to classify sagittal spinal morphology into subtypes, stratified across age groups. Further univariate and multivariate analyses were conducted to compare radiographic parameters across subtypes, and identify predictors for the lumbar curve's angular magnitude, span and apex. RESULTS: Mean cLL was -57.27±11.37°, and tLL was -62.62±10.76°. Using tLL, instead of cLL, to describe sagittal spinal morphology, we found significant differences in terms of angular magnitude of the lumbar curve, the median thoracolumbar inflection vertebral level and pelvic incidence-lumbar lordosis mismatch Multivariate analysis found a larger SS, more positive T9 tilt, and more kyphotic T4-T12 predictive for a more lordotic tLL, while a larger overhang distance predicted for a less lordotic tLL (p-values<.001). In addition, a larger T9 tilt, less lordotic L1-L5 and smaller PT were predictors of a more caudal thoracolumbar inflection and lumbar apical vertebral levels (p-values<.001). Sagittal lumbar profiles of subjects age<30 years, 30≤age<60 years and age≥60 years, could be classified into 4, 6, and 3 subtypes, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Sagittal lumbar profile subtypes vary across age groups, with more homogenous morphologies at the extremes of ages. Improved understanding of the morphological evolution of sagittal spinal profiles with age in asymptomatic individuals will help guide future individualized surgical treatment.

Introduction of a Novel "Segmentation Line" to Analyze the Variations in Segmental Lordosis, Location of the Lumbar Apex, and Their Correlation with Spinopelvic Parameters in Asymptomatic Adults.

STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. PURPOSE: This study aimed to understand the sagittal spinopelvic parameters, segmental lumbar parameters, and lumbar apex location in asymptomatic adults and analyze their correlations with each other. OVERVIEW OF LITERATURE: Roussouly and his colleagues reported that pelvic incidence (PI) influences the lower arc of lumbar lordosis, whereas Pesenti and his colleagues reported that PI influences only the proximal part of lordosis and not the distal part. Both studies have their shortcomings. METHODS: One hundred asymptomatic adult volunteers (mean age, 29.1±7.9 years; 69 males, 31 females) who satisfied the selection criteria were enrolled in this study. Standing antero-posterior and lateral whole spine and pelvis X-rays were performed, and the radiographic parameters were analyzed. We introduced a "segmentation line" bisecting the apical vertebra/disk to divide the upper arc of lumbar lordosis (ULL) and lower arc of lumbar lordosis (LLL). RESULTS: The mean PI was 48.02°, ULL 29.12°, LLL 16.02°, total lumbar lordosis (TLL) 45.14°, lumbar tilt angle 4.73°, and location of the apex of lumbar lordosis (LLA) 4.11°. The location of the lumbar apex moved higher as the PI increased. The PI was strongly positively correlated with the LLL (r =0.582, p <0.001) and TLL (r =0.579, p <0.001) but not with the ULL (r =0.196, p =0.05). The LLA was strongly positively correlated with the ULL (r =0.349, p <0.001), negatively with the LLL (r =-0.63, p <0.001), and not correlated with the TLL (r =-0.177, p =0.078). CONCLUSIONS: The PI influences the location of the lumbar apex, the LLL, and the TLL but not the ULL. The location of the lumbar apex significantly influences the segmental lordosis but not the TLL.