ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: Laminectomy and fusion (LF) and laminoplasty (LP) are 2 sucessful posterior decompression techniques for cervical myelo-radiculopathy. There is also a growing body of evidence describing the importance of cervical sagittal alignment (CSA) and its importance in outcomes. We investigated the difference between pre- and postoperative CSA parameters in and between LF or LP. Furthermore, we studied predictive variables associated with change in cervical mismatch (CM). METHODS: This is a retrospective cohort study of adults with cervical myeloradiculopathy in a single healthcare system. The primary outcomes are intra- and inter-cohort comparison of LF versus LP radiographic parameters at pre- and postoperative time points. A secondary multivariable analysis of predictive factors was performed evaluating factors predicting postoperative CM. RESULTS: Eighty nine patients were included; 38 (43%) had LF and 51 (57%) underwent LP. Both groups decreased in lordosis (LF 11.4° vs. 4.9°, P = 0.01; LP 15.2° vs. 9.1°, P < 0.001), increased in cSVA (LF 3.4 vs. 4.2 cm, P = 0.01; LP 3.2 vs. 4.2 cm, P < 0.001), and increased in CM (LF 22.0° vs. 28.5°, P = 0.02; LP 16.8° vs. 22.3°, P = 0.002). There were no significant differences in the postoperative CSA between groups. No significant predictors of change in pre- and postoperative CM were found. CONSLUSIONS: There were no significant pre-or postoperative differences following the 2 procedures, suggesting radiographic equipoise in well indicated patients. Across all groups, lordosis decreased, cSVA increased, and cervical mismatch increased. There were no predictive factors that led to change in cervical mismatch.
Subject(s)
Laminoplasty , Lordosis , Radiculopathy , Spinal Fusion , Adult , Humans , Laminectomy/methods , Spinal Fusion/methods , Lordosis/diagnostic imaging , Lordosis/surgery , Retrospective Studies , Laminoplasty/methods , Treatment Outcome , Postoperative Complications/diagnostic imaging , Postoperative Complications/etiology , Postoperative Complications/surgery , Cervical Vertebrae/diagnostic imaging , Cervical Vertebrae/surgery , Radiculopathy/surgeryABSTRACT
STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective study. OBJECTIVE: Proximal junctional failure (PJF) commonly occurs as a recognized potential outcome of fusion surgery. Here we describe a unique series of patients with multilevel spine fusion including the cervical spine, who developed PJF as an odontoid fracture. METHODS: We performed a single site retrospective review of patients with prior fusion that included a cervical component, who presented with an odontoid fracture between 2012 and 2019. Radiographic measurements included C2-C7 SVA, C2-C7 lordosis, T1 slope, Occiput-C2 angle, proximal junctional kyphosis, and cervical mismatch. Associated fractures, medical comorbidities, and treatments were determined via chart review after IRB approval. RESULTS: Nine patients met inclusion criteria. 5 reported trauma with subsequent onset of pain. All patients sustained a Type II odontoid fracture. 5 with associated C1/Jefferson fractures. In all patients, pre-injury Occiput-C2 angle was outside normative range; C2-C7 SVA was greater than 4 cm in 6 patients; T1-slope minus cervical lordosis was greater than 18.5 degrees in 6 patients. 7 patients were treated operatively with extension of fusion to C1 and 2 patients declined operative treatment. CONCLUSION: In this series of 9 patients with multilevel fusion with type II odontoid fractures, all patients demonstrated abnormal pre-fracture sagittal alignment parameters and a greater than normal association of C1 fractures was noted. Further study is needed to establish the role of poor sagittal alignment with compensatory occiput-C2 angulation as a predisposing factor for odontoid fracture as a proximal junctional failure mechanism.
ABSTRACT
Background: Although there are studies that adequately document the linear correlation between pelvic incidence (PI), sacral slope, lumbar lordosis, and thoracic kyphosis, few have analyzed the pelvic-spine correlation including the cervical spine. Methods: This is a cross-sectional study, wherein the cervical spine was evaluated using radiography and computed tomography (CT) scans, the lumbosacral spine and the pelvis was evaluated using radiography, in adult patients without spinal pathology. Using the Surgimap tool, cervical and spinopelvic parameters were calculated by several investigators. To evaluate the correlation between cervical and spinopelvic parameters, Spearman's coefficient was calculated. To evaluate the concordance correlation of the measured parameters of cervical sagittal alignment on tomography and conventional radiography, Lin's coefficient was calculated and Bland-Altman plots were performed. Results: A total of 51 healthy adults were included in a follow-up from January 2019 to December 2020. Cervical sagittal alignment and sagittal spinopelvic alignment were assessed using radiography, and a correlation was observed between T1 slope (T1S) and lumbar mismatch (coefficient of 0.28, P = 0.047). Then, cervical sagittal alignment was evaluated using CT and sagittal spinopelvic alignment using radiography, and no correlation was observed between PI and thoracic inlet angle or cervical mismatch with lumbar mismatch. Conclusion: In asymptomatic patients, in whom cervical sagittal alignment and spinal-pelvic alignment were evaluated, only a positive correlation was found between lumbar mismatch and T1S, which lacks clinical significance. No concordance was identified between lumbar mismatch and cervical mismatch. Therefore, it is inferred that there is an independence between the sagittal spine-pelvic alignment with respect to the sagittal cervical alignment.
ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: Numerous studies have attempted to delineate the normative value for T1S-CL (T1 slope minus cervical lordosis) as a marker for both cervical deformity and a goal for correction similar to how PI-LL (pelvic incidence-lumbar lordosis) mismatch informs decision making in thoracolumbar adult spinal deformity (ASD). The goal of this study was to define the relationship between T1 slope (T1S) and cervical lordosis (CL). METHODS: This is a retrospective review of a prospective database. Surgical ASD cases were initially analyzed. Analysis across the sagittal parameters was performed. Linear regression analysis based on T1S was used to provide a clinically applicable equation to predict CL. Findings were validated using the postoperative alignment of the ASD patients. Further validation was then performed using a second, normative database. The range of normal alignment associated with horizontal gaze was derived from a multilinear regression on data from asymptomatic patients. RESULTS: A total of 103 patients (mean age 54.7 years) were included. Analysis revealed a strong correlation between T1S and C0-7 lordosis (r = 0.886), C2-7 lordosis (r = 0.815), and C0-2 lordosis (r = 0.732). There was no significant correlation between T1S and T1S-CL. Linear regression analysis revealed that T1S-CL assumed a constant value of 16.5° (R2 = 0.664, standard error 2°). These findings were validated on the postoperative imaging (mean absolute error [MAE] 5.9°). The equation was then applied to the normative database (MAE 6.7° controlling for McGregor slope [MGS] between -5° and 15°). A multilinear regression between C2-7, T1S, and MGS demonstrated a range of T1S-CL between 14.5° and 26.5° was necessary to maintain horizontal gaze. CONCLUSIONS: Normative CL can be predicted via the formula CL = T1S - 16.5° ± 2°. This implies a threshold of deformity and aids in providing a goal for surgical correction. Just as pelvic incidence (PI) can be used to determine the ideal LL, T1S can be used to predict ideal CL. This formula also implies that a kyphotic cervical alignment is to be expected for individuals with a T1S < 16.5°.