What factors are associated with a better restoration of pelvic version after adult spinal deformity surgery?

INTRODUCTION: Poor restoration of pelvic version after adult spinal deformity (ASD) surgery is associated with an increased risk of mechanical complications and worse quality of life. We studied the factors linked to the improvement of postoperative pelvic version. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This is a retrospective analysis of a prospective multicenter ASD database. Selection criteria were: operated patients having preoperative severe pelvic retroversion as per GAP score (Relative Pelvic Version-RPV < - 15°); panlumbar fusions to the pelvis; 2-year follow-up. Group A comprised patients with any postoperative improvement of RPV score, and group B had no improvement. Groups were compared regarding baseline characteristics, surgical factors, and postoperative sagittal parameters. Parametric and non-parametric analyses were employed. RESULTS: 177 patients were studied, median age 67 years (61; 72.5), 83.6% female. Groups were homogeneous in baseline demographics, comorbidities, and preoperative sagittal parameters (p > 0.05). The difference in RPV improvement was 11.56º. Group A (137 patients) underwent a higher percentage of ALIF procedures (OR = 6.66; p = 0.049), and posterior osteotomies (OR = 4.96; p < 0.001) especially tricolumnar (OR = 2.31; p = 0.041). It also showed a lower percentage of TLIF procedures (OR = 0.45; p = 0.028), and posterior decompression (OR = 0.44; p = 0.024). Group A displayed better postoperative L4-S1 angle and relative lumbar lordosis (RLL), leading to improved sacral slope (and RPV), and global alignment (RSA). Group A patients had longer instrumentations (11.45 vs 10; p = 0.047) and hospitalization time (13 vs 11; p = 0.045). All postoperative sagittal parameters remained significantly better in group A through follow-up. However, differences between the groups narrowed over time. CONCLUSIONS: ALIF procedures and posterior column osteotomies improved pelvic version postoperatively, and associated better L4-S1 and lumbar lordosis restoration, indirectly improving all other sagittal parameters. However, these improvements seemed to fade during the 2-year follow-up.

Which sagittal plane assessment method is most predictive of complications after adult spinal deformity surgery?

PURPOSE: Different methods of sagittal alignment assessment compete for predicting adverse events after adult spinal deformity (ASD) surgery. We wanted to study which method provides greater benefit. METHODS: Retrospective study of 391 patients operated for ASD, with > 6 instrumented levels, fused to the pelvis, and 2 years of follow-up. Three alignment methods were analyzed 6-week postoperatively: (1) Roussouly mismatch; (2) GAP score/GAP categories; (3) T4-L1-Hip axis. Binary logistic regression generated models that best predict the following adverse events: mechanical complications (MC): in general and isolated (PJK, PJF, rod breakage); reinterventions (in general and after MC); and readmissions. ROC/AUC analysis was also implemented. In a second regression round, we added different variables that were selected on univariate analysis-demographic, surgical, and radiographic-to complete the models. RESULTS: The best predictor parameters in most models were T4-L1PA mismatch and GAP score; we could not prove a predictive ability of the Roussouly mismatch. The T4-L1PA mismatch best predicted general MC, PJK, PJK + PJF, and readmission, while the GAP score best predicted PJF and reinterventions (for MC and for any complication). However, the variance explained by these models was limited (Nagelkerke's R2 = 0.031-0.113), with odds ratios ranging from 1.070 to 1.456. ROC curves plotted an AUC between 0.57 and 0.70. Introducing additional variables (demographic, surgical, and radiographic) improved prediction in all the models (Nagelkerke's R2 = 0.082-0.329) and allowed predicting rod breakage. CONCLUSION: The T4-L1-Hip axis and GAP score show potential in predicting adverse events, surpassing the Roussouly method. Despite partial efficacy in complication anticipation, recognizing postoperative sagittal alignment as a key modifiable risk factor, the crucial need arises to integrate diverse variables, both modifiable and non-modifiable, for enhanced predictive accuracy. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV.

The use of the Core Yellow Flags Index for the assessment of psychosocial distress in patients undergoing surgery of the cervical spine.

BACKGROUND: Psychosocial distress (the presence of yellow flags) has been linked to poor outcomes in spine surgery. The Core Yellow Flags Index (CYFI), a short instrument assessing the 4 main yellow flags, was developed for use in patients undergoing lumbar spine surgery. This study evaluated its ability to predict outcome in patients undergoing cervical spine surgery. METHODS: Patients with degenerative spinal disorders (excluding myelopathy) operated in one centre, from 2015 to 2019, were asked to complete the CYFI at baseline and the Core Outcome Measures Index (COMI) at baseline and 3 and 12 months after surgery. The relationship between CYFI and COMI scores at baseline as well as the predictive ability of the CYFI on the COMI follow-up scores were tested using structural equation modelling. RESULTS: From 731 eligible patients, 547 (61.0 ± 12.5 years; 57.2% female) completed forms at all three timepoints. On a cross-sectional basis, preoperative CYFI and COMI scores were highly correlated (ß = 0.54, in men and 0.51 in women; each p < 0.001). CYFI added significantly and independently to the prediction of COMI at 3 months' FU in men (ß = 0.36) and 12 months' FU in men and women (both ß = 0.20) (all p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The CYFI had a low to moderate but significant and independent association with cervical spine surgery outcomes. Implementing the CYFI in the preoperative workup of these patients could help refine outcome predictions and better manage patient expectations.

Comparing image normalization techniques in an end-to-end model for automated modic changes classification from MRI images.

Introduction: Modic Changes (MCs) are MRI alterations in spine vertebrae's signal intensity. This study introduces an end-to-end model to automatically detect and classify MCs in lumbar MRIs. The model's two-step process involves locating intervertebral regions and then categorizing MC types (MC0, MC1, MC2) using paired T1-and T2-weighted images. This approach offers a promising solution for efficient and standardized MC assessment. Research question: The aim is to investigate how different MRI normalization techniques affect MCs classification and how the model can be used in a clinical setting. Material and methods: A combination of Faster R-CNN and a 3D Convolutional Neural Network (CNN) is employed. The model first identifies intervertebral regions and then classifies MC types (MC0, MC1, MC2) using paired T1-and T2-weighted lumbar MRIs. Two datasets are used for model development and evaluation. Results: The detection model achieves high accuracy in identifying intervertebral areas, with Intersection over Union (IoU) values above 0.7, indicating strong localization alignment. Confidence scores above 0.9 demonstrate the model's accurate levels identification. In the classification task, standardization proves the best performances for MC type assessment, achieving mean sensitivities of 0.83 for MC0, 0.85 for MC1, and 0.78 for MC2, along with balanced accuracy of 0.80 and F1 score of 0.88. Discussion and conclusion: The study's end-to-end model shows promise in automating MC assessment, contributing to standardized diagnostics and treatment planning. Limitations include dataset size, class imbalance, and lack of external validation. Future research should focus on external validation, refining model generalization, and improving clinical applicability.

Influence of smoking on patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in patients undergoing surgery for adult spinal deformity: a propensity score-matched analysis.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to determine the isolated influence of smoking in patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) for adult spinal deformity (ASD) surgery excluding known tobacco-related complications. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of a prospective multicenter ASD database. Patients operated on ASD with 2 year post-operative follow-up were included. Former smokers (non-active smokers) and patients developing mechanical or infectious complications were excluded. Changes of PROMs over time were analyzed using mixed models for repeated measures (MMRM). Propensity score matching (PSM) (1:1 ratio, caliper 0.10) was performed without replacement using optimum algorithm, tolerance ≤ 0.001, and estimated with 95% confidence interval (CI). PROMS in both groups were compared by paired t test or Wilcoxon signed-rank test. RESULTS: 692 out of 1246 surgical patients met our inclusion criteria. 153 smokers were matched with 153 non-smokers according to age, BMI, number of fused levels, and global tilt. After PSM both groups were homogeneous regarding baseline parameters, surgical data, and complications (mechanical complications and infection excluded). Smokers had worse baseline results for SRS-total, SRS-pain COMI-back, and ODI; smokers also showed worse 2-year outcomes for SRS-total, SRS-function, SRS-pain, SRS-self-image, and ODI. However, no differences between the two groups were found in the improvement from baseline to 2-year follow-up or in the timing of this improvement (MMRM). The proportion of patients reaching the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) after surgery was similar in the two groups, but the proportion of patients reaching patient acceptable symptom state (PASS) was significantly lower in smokers for SRS-Subtotal, SRS-function, and SRS-image. CONCLUSION: Even in the absence of smoking-related complications, smokers had worse PROMs at baseline and 2 years after surgery with less patients achieving PASS, but similar degrees on improvement compared to non-smokers. The proportion achieving MCID was also similar between the two cohorts.

A decade of experience in over 300 surgically treated spine patients with long-term oral anticoagulation: a propensity score matched cohort study.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to investigate the risks and outcomes of patients with long-term oral anticoagulation (OAC) undergoing spine surgery. METHODS: All patients on long-term OAC who underwent spine surgery between 01/2005 and 06/2015 were included. Data were prospectively collected within our in-house Spine Surgery registry and retrospectively supplemented with patient chart and administrative database information. A 1:1 propensity score-matched group of patients without OAC from the same time interval served as control. Primary outcomes were post-operative bleeding, wound complications and thromboembolic events up to 90 days post-surgery. Secondary outcomes included intraoperative blood loss, length of hospital stay, death and 3-month post-operative patient-rated outcomes. RESULTS: In comparison with the control group, patients with OAC (n = 332) had a 3.4-fold (95%CI 1.3-9.0) higher risk for post-operative bleeding, whereas the risks for wound complications and thromboembolic events were comparable between groups. The higher bleeding risk was driven by a higher rate of extraspinal haematomas (3.3% vs. 0.6%; p = 0.001), while there was no difference in epidural haematomas and haematoma evacuations. Risk factors for adverse events among patients with OAC were mechanical heart valves, posterior neck surgery, blood loss > 1000 mL, age, female sex, BMI > 30 kg/m2 and post-operative PTT levels. At 3-month follow-up, most patients reported favourable outcomes with no difference between groups. CONCLUSION: Although OAC patients have a higher risk for complications after spine surgery, the risk for major events is low and patients benefit similarly from surgery.

Sagittal alignment of diverse mechanical complications following adult spinal deformity surgery.

PURPOSE: To compare the sagittal alignment of patients with diverse mechanical complications (MCs) following adult spinal deformity (ASD) surgery with that of patients without MCs. METHODS: A total of 371 patients who underwent ASD surgery were enrolled. The sagittal spinopelvic parameters were measured preoperatively and at the 6-month and last follow-up, and the global alignment and proportion (GAP) score was calculated. The subjects were divided into non-MC and MCs groups, and the MCs group was further divided into rod fracture (RF), screw breakage (SB), screw dislodgement (SD) and proximal junctional kyphosis (PJK) subgroups. RESULTS: Preoperatively, the RF group had greater thoracolumbar kyphosis (TLK) and relative upper lumbar lordosis (RULL); the SB group had the largest pelvic incidence (PI) and lumbar lordosis (LL); the SD group had the least global sagittal imbalance; and the PJK group had the highest thoracic kyphosis (TK), TLK and RULL. At the last follow-up, the RF and SB groups featured a large PI minus LL (PI-LL), while the PJK group featured a prominent TK; all the MCs subgroups had sagittal malalignment and a higher GAP score, and the SB group had the most severe cases. Logistic regressions showed that the relative spinopelvic alignment (RSA) score was correlated with RF, SB and SD, while the RSA and age scores were associated with PJK. CONCLUSION: Each patient with MCs had individual characteristics in the sagittal plane following ASD surgery, which may be helpful to understand the pathophysiology of poor sagittal alignment with its subsequent MCs and guide an eventual revision strategy.

Patient-reported outcomes 1 and 2 years after transforaminal thoracic interbody fusion (TTIF).

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective Cohort Study with prospectively collected data. PURPOSE: Transforaminal interbody fusion was initially designed for the lumbar spine. A similar approach was later introduced for the thoracic spine (TTIF). Here we report the surgical technique and the Core Outcome Measures Index (COMI) at 1-year and 2-year follow-ups, as well as the sagittal radiographic kyphosis correction of TTIF, achieved at 1 year and the latest follow-up. METHODS: All TTIF procedures from 2012 to 2020 were included. COMI scores were collected preoperatively and at 1- and 2-year follow-ups. The sagittal angle between the upper and lower endplates at the segment where TTIF was performed was measured on preoperative, 1-year postoperative, and last available radiographs. RESULTS: Seventy-nine TTIF procedures were performed for 64 patients (36% males; mean age 67.5 (SD 15.3) years). COMI score reduced from a mean value of 8.1 (SD 1.4) preoperatively to 4.7 (SD 2.7) at 1-year follow-up and 4.7 (SD 2.7) at 2-year follow-up. The mean correction of segmental kyphosis was 10.8 (SD 7.3, p < 0.0001) degrees at 1-year follow-up and 9.3 (SD 7.0, p < 0.0001) degrees at the final follow-up 3.4 (SD 1.4) years after the operation. Kaplan-Meier analysis for reoperations showed a 5-year survival of 91% (95% CI 0.795-1) for primary TTIF operations and survival of 77% (95% CI 0.651-0.899) for TTIFs performed after earlier fusion operations. CONCLUSIONS: TTIF is a feasible procedure in the thoracic spine. Kyphosis correction of approximately 10° was maintained at 1-year and final follow-up. Over 69% at 1-year and 61% at 2-year follow-up achieved MCID for COMI.

Cost Benefit of Implementation of Risk Stratification Models for Adult Spinal Deformity Surgery.

STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: Retrospective cohort study. OBJECTIVE: Assess the extent to which defined risk factors of adverse events are drivers of cost-utility in spinal deformity (ASD) surgery. METHODS: ASD patients with 2-year (2Y) data were included. Tertiles were used to define high degrees of frailty, sagittal deformity, blood loss, and surgical time. Cost was calculated using the Pearl Diver registry and cost-utility at 2Y was compared between cohorts based on the number of risk factors present. Statistically significant differences in cost-utility by number of baseline risk factors were determined using ANOVA, followed by a generalized linear model, adjusting for clinical site and surgeon, to assess the effects of increasing risk score on overall cost-utility. RESULTS: By 2 years, 31% experienced a major complication and 23% underwent reoperation. Patients with ≤2 risk factors had significantly less major complications. Patients with 2 risk factors improved the most from baseline to 2Y in ODI. Average cost increased by $8234 per risk factor (R2 = .981). Cost-per-QALY at 2Y increased by $122,650 per risk factor (R2 = .794). Adjusted generalized linear model demonstrated a significant trend between increasing risk score and increasing cost-utility (r2 = .408, P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: The number of defined patient-specific and surgical risk factors, especially those with greater than two, were associated with increased index surgical costs and diminished cost-utility. Efforts to optimize patient physiology and minimize surgical risk would likely reduce healthcare expenditures and improve the overall cost-utility profile for ASD interventions.Level of evidence: III.

Far Lateral Lumbar Decompression Using the Far-Lateral Approach: Patient Reported Outcome is Associated with the Involved Vertebral Level and Coronal Segmental Angle.

STUDY DESIGN: Single centre retrospective study of prospectively collected data. OBJECTIVE: Analyse factors associated with patient reported outcome after far lateral decompression surgery (FLDS) for lumbar nerve root compression using the far-lateral approach. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: To date, no studies have investigated the influence of vertebral level, coronal segmental Cobb angle, and the nature of the compressive tissue (hard/soft) on patient reported outcome following FLDS. METHODS: Patients who had undergone FLDS between 2005 and 2020 were included. Coronal segmental angle (CSCA) was measured on preoperative, posteroanterior radiographs. Primary outcome measure was the Core Outcome Measures Index (COMI) score at 2 years' follow-up (2Y-FU). Patients who had undergone microsurgical decompression using a midline approach (MID) served as a comparator group. RESULTS: There were 148 FLDS and 463 MID patients. In both groups there was a significant improvement in COMI score from preoperative to 2Y-FU (P<0.0001), with greater improvement in patients treated at higher vertebral levels than in those treated at L5/S1 (P=0.014). Baseline COMI, ASA grade, BMI, and low back pain as the "chief complaint" all had a significant association with the 2-year COMI score. The nature of compressive tissue showed no association with COMI score at 2Y-FU. In the FLDS group, there was a statistically significant correlation between the preoperative CSCA and change in COMI score preoperatively to 2Y-FU (P<0.001). The association was retained in multiple regression analysis controlling for confounders. A one-degree increase in CSCA was associated with a 0.35-point worse COMI score at 2Y-FU (P=0.003). CONCLUSION: Treatment of far lateral nerve root compression showed overall good patient reported outcome, but with less improvement with advanced coronal segmental angulation. Modified approaches and techniques might be preferable for the level L5/S1.

Automatic Calculation of Cervical Spine Parameters Using Deep Learning: Development and Validation on an External Dataset.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective data analysis. OBJECTIVES: This study aims to develop a deep learning model for the automatic calculation of some important spine parameters from lateral cervical radiographs. METHODS: We collected two datasets from two different institutions. The first dataset of 1498 images was used to train and optimize the model to find the best hyperparameters while the second dataset of 79 images was used as an external validation set to evaluate the robustness and generalizability of our model. The performance of the model was assessed by calculating the median absolute errors between the model prediction and the ground truth for the following parameters: T1 slope, C7 slope, C2-C7 angle, C2-C6 angle, Sagittal Vertical Axis (SVA), C0-C2, Redlund-Johnell distance (RJD), the cranial tilting (CT) and the craniocervical angle (CCA). RESULTS: Regarding the angles, we found median errors of 1.66° (SD 2.46°), 1.56° (1.95°), 2.46° (SD 2.55), 1.85° (SD 3.93°), 1.25° (SD 1.83°), .29° (SD .31°) and .67° (SD .77°) for T1 slope, C7 slope, C2-C7, C2-C6, C0-C2, CT, and CCA respectively. As concerns the distances, we found median errors of .55 mm (SD .47 mm) and .47 mm (.62 mm) for SVA and RJD respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In this work, we developed a model that was able to accurately predict cervical spine parameters from lateral cervical radiographs. In particular, the performances on the external validation set demonstrate the robustness and the high degree of generalizability of our model on images acquired in a different institution.

Fixed coronal malalignment (CM) in the lumbar spine independently impacts disability in adult spinal deformity (ASD) patients when considering the obeid-CM (O-CM) classification.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative flatback has been described in detail for sagittal plane considerations over the past 2 decades, and its correlations with disability are now accepted. Fixed Coronal Malalignment (CM) has been less described, and some authors report no significant association with the clinical outcome. The O-CM classification analyses CM and incorporates specific modifiers for each curve type. PURPOSE: This study evaluates the O-CM classification modifiers according to age, sagittal alignment, and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). Our hypothesis is that fixed CM correlates with PROMs independently from sagittal alignment and age. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective analysis of a large adult spinal deformity (ASD) database prospectively collected. PATIENT SAMPLE: We included 747 patients from the database with long lumbar fusion (more than 3 levels), with at least two years of follow-up. Three categories of patients met the inclusion criteria (prior surgery at baseline and no revision surgery afterward, prior surgery at baseline and revision afterward, no prior surgery at baseline but fusion>3 levels and 2 years follow-up). OUTCOME MEASURES: All patients completed the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Short Form 36 (SF36), and Scoliosis Research Society 22 scores. METHODS: The patients were classified according to the six modifiers of the O-CM classification. Central Sacral Vertical Line (CSVL) above 2, 3, and 4 cm's impact on PROMs was analyzed. Multivariate analysis was performed on the relationship between PROMS and age, global tilt (GT), and CM modifiers. RESULTS: After multivariate analysis using age and GT as confounding factors, we found that CM independently affects PROMs starting at 2 cm offset. Disability increases linearly with CSVL. Patients classified with 2B modifiers have the worst SRS-22 total score, social life, and self-image. CONCLUSION: In a fused spine, CM independently affects disability in ASD patients. Disability increases linearly with CSVL. Despite previous reports that failed to find correlations of CM with PROMs, our study showed that fixed postoperative CM, according to O-CM classification, correlates independently from sagittal malalignment with worse PROMs. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.

Relationship between pelvic incidence-adjusted relative spinopelvic parameters, global sagittal alignment and lower extremity compensations.

PURPOSE: In response to sagittal malalignment, compensatory spinal and lower extremity mechanisms are recruited. Thoracolumbar realignment surgery has been shown to yield reciprocal changes in these compensations. Thus, whole-body radiographic assessment has come to the fore. This study aimed to evaluate the relationship between spinopelvic parameters and lower extremity compensation angles and to examine their coupled change with deformity correction. METHODS: This was a multicenter retrospective analysis of patients who had ≥ 4 levels posterior fusion, whole-body radiographs, and ≥ 2 years follow-up. Relative Pelvic Version (RPV), Relative Lumbar Lordosis (RLL), Relative Spinopelvic Alignment (RSA), Femoral Obliquity Angle (FOA), Knee Flexion Angle (KFA) and Global Sagittal Axis (GSA) were measured preoperatively and 6 week postoperatively. Kruskal-Wallis tests were performed to assess the relation of relative spinopelvic parameters to global sagittal alignment and lower extremity compensation angles. Spearman's correlations were performed to assess correlations of pre-to-postoperative changes. RESULTS: 193 patients (156F, 37 M) were included. The mean age was 57.2 ± 16.6 years. The mean follow-up duration was 50.6 (24-90) months. On average, 10.3 ± 3.8 levels were fused. Among the cohort, 124 (64.2%) had a sacral or sacroiliac fixation, and 43 (22.3%) had 3-column osteotomies. Preoperative FOA, KFA and GSA significantly differed between RPV, RLL and RSA categories. Significant weak-to-strong correlations were observed between spinopelvic parameters, global sagittal alignment and lower extremity compensation angles (rho range: - 0.351 to 0.767). CONCLUSIONS: PI-adjusted relative spinopelvic parameters significantly correlated with measurements of the lower extremity compensation. Postoperative changes in RPV, RLL and RSA reflected changes in FOA, KFA and GSA. These measurements may serve as a valuable proxy for surgical planning when whole-body imaging is not available.

Sagittal realignment: surgical restoration of the global alignment and proportion score parameters: a subgroup analysis. What are the consequences of failing to realign?

INTRODUCTION: The Global Alignment and Proportion (GAP) score incorporates three domains directly modified with surgery (relative pelvic version-RPV, relative lumbar lordosis-RLL, lumbar distribution index-LDI) and one indirectly restored (relative spinopelvic alignment-RSA). We analyzed our surgical realignment performance and the consequences of domain-specific realignment failure on mechanical complications and PROMs. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From an adult spinal deformity prospective multicenter database, we selected patients: fused to pelvis, upper instrumented vertebra at or above L1, and 2 years of follow-up. Descriptive, univariate and multivariate analyses were employed. RESULTS: The sample included 333 patients. RLL-6w showed the highest success rate (58.3% aligned), but 16.5% of patients were classified in the "Severe hypolordosis" and "Hyperlordosis" subgroups. RPV-6w was the most challenging to realign, with 51.6% moderate or severe retroversion. Regarding RSA-6w, 21.9% had severe positive malalignment. Correct alignment of RPV-6w (p = 0.025) and RSA-6w (p = 0.002) proved to be protective factors against the development of mechanical complications. Severe pelvic retroversion (p = 0.026) and severe positive malalignment (p = 0.007) were risk factors for mechanical complications. RSA-6w "Severe positive malalignment" was associated with less improvement in PROMs: ∆ODI (8.83 vs 17.2; p = 0.011), ∆SRS-22 total (0.54 vs 0.87; p = 0.007), and ∆SF-36PCS (3.47 vs 7.76; p = 0.04); MCID for ODI (37.0 vs 55.5%; p = 0.023), and SRS-22 (40.8 vs 60.1%; p = 0.015); and PASS for ODI (17.6 vs 31.7%; p = 0.047). CONCLUSIONS: RPV was the most underperformed modifiable parameter. Severe pelvic retroversion and severe positive malalignment influenced the occurrence of mechanical complications. Severe positive malalignment affected PROMs improvement.

Revision surgery following long lumbopelvic constructs for adult spinal deformity: prospective experience from two dedicated databases.

PURPOSE: Pan Lumbar Arthodesis (PLA) are often required for Adult Spinal Deformity (ASD) correction, reducing significantly the compensatory capacity in case of postoperative sagittal malalignment. Few papers have investigated outcomes and complications in this vulnerable subset of patients. The objective of this study was to assess revision surgery rate for PLA in ASD, its risk factors and impact on clinical outcomes. METHODS: Retrospective multicenter review of prospective ASD data from 7 hospitals covering Europe and Asia. ASD patients included in two prospective databases having a posterior instrumentation spanning the whole lumbar region with more than 2-years of follow-up were reviewed. Demographic, surgical, radiographic parameters and Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) scores were analyzed. Univariate and multivariate regression models analyzed risk factors for revision surgery as well as surgical outcomes. Patients with Early versus Late and PJK versus Non-PJK mechanical complications were also compared. RESULTS: Out of 1359 ASD patients included in the database 589 (43%) had a PLA and 357 reached 2-years mark. They were analyzed and compared to non-PLA patients. Average age was 67 and 82% were females. 100 Patients (28.1%) needed 114 revision surgeries (75.4% for mechanical failures). Revised patients were more likely to have a nerve system disorder, higher BMI and worst immediate postoperative alignment (as measured by GAP Parameters). These risk factors were also associated with earlier mechanical complications and PJK. Deformity and HRQoL parameters were comparable at baseline. Non-revised patients had significantly better clinical outcomes at 2-years (SRS 22 scores, ODI, Back pain). Multivariate analysis could identify nerve system disorder (OR 4.8; CI 1.8-12.6; p = 0.001), postoperative sagittal alignment (GAP Score) and high BMI (OR 1.07; CI 1.01-1.13; p = 0.004) as independent risk factors for revisions. CONCLUSIONS: Revision surgery due to mechanical failures is relatively common after PLA leading to worse clinical outcomes. Prevention strategies should focus on individualized restoration of sagittal alignment and better weight control to decrease stress on these rigid constructs in non-compliant spines. Nerve system disorders independently increase revision risk in PLA. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE II: Prognosis.

A 5-year follow-up of the effect of corrective surgery in young adults with idiopathic scoliosis.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to determine mid-long-term outcomes (5 years) following surgery for young adult idiopathic scoliosis (YAdIS). METHODS: This is a retrospective review of a prospective, multicenter adult deformity database including patients operated on idiopathic scoliosis by a single posterior approach, age at surgery between 19 and 29 (considered young adults), and 5-year follow-up. Demographic, radiographic and PROMS were analyzed preoperatively, at 2 years and at final follow-up. RESULTS: Forty-two patients were included. Mean preoperative major curve angle was 59.65 ± 18.94. Main coronal curve initial correction was 56.38%, with 6% loss at 5 years. From baseline to 5 years after surgery, there was improvement in all PROMs (P < 0.004)-especially self-image-, except NRS-leg pain. This improvement was present at 6 months for all PROMs except for functional outcomes (SRS-Function and ODI) in which the improvement took place between 6 months and 2 years. In the 2- to 5-year follow-up period, no significant changes were seen in any PROMs. The percentage of patients reaching MCID from baseline at 5 years was: 75% for SRS-image, 45% for SRS-pain, 47.5% for SRS-function, 51.3% for SRS-mental, 42.5% for SRS-total and 15.4% for ODI. Patients reaching PASS at 5 years were: 88.1% for SRS-image, 81% for SRS-pain, 92.9% for SRS-function, 57.1% for SRS-mental, 88.1% for SRS-total, 92.7% for ODI and 69% for NRS pain. 11 minor and 4 major complications were identified. CONCLUSION: YAdIS surgery resulted in an early and significant improvement in PROMs, especially for self-image, significantly reaching MCID and PASS thresholds. These results were maintained during long-term (5-year) follow-up.

Does the use of postoperative brace help preventing mechanical complications following adult deformity surgery?

PURPOSE: There is scarce information regarding the effectiveness of postoperative braces in decreasing mechanical complications and reinterventions following adult deformity surgery. METHODS: Retrospective matched cohort study from a prospective adult deformity multicenter database. We selected operated patients, fused to the pelvis, > 6 instrumented levels, and minimum 2 year follow-up. Three hundred and eighty patients were separated into two groups (Brace-3 months TLSO-vs No Brace) and then matched controlling for age, gender and frailty. We studied demographic, intraoperative, and postoperative spinopelvic parameters. Both groups were compared regarding complications and reinterventions in the first 2 postoperative years, using univariate and multivariate logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: We finally analyzed 359 matched patients, mean age of 65.3 ± 8.9 years, frailty-index (0.43 ± 0.15), and mostly females (84%). 224 patients wore a postoperative brace (B) and 135 didn't (NoB). They showed no difference in intraoperative variables and postoperative spinopelvic alignment. They differed (P < 0.05) in: Pelvic incidence (B:58° ± 13 vs NoB:54.5° ± 13); BMI (B:25.8 ± 4 vs NoB:27.4 ± 5); upper instrumented vertebra (B:81.7% T8-L1 vs NoB:72.6% T8-L1), and the use of multiple rods (B:47.3% vs NoB:18.5%). Univariate analysis showed a higher rate of mechanical complications and reinterventions when not using a brace. As well as higher NRS-back and leg pain at 6 weeks. However, multivariate analysis selected the use of multiple rods as the only independent factor protecting against mechanical complications (OR: 0.38; CI 95% 0.22-0.64) and reinterventions (OR: 0.41; CI 95% 0.216-0.783). CONCLUSION: After controlling for potential confounders, our study could not identify the protective effect of postoperative braces preventing mechanical complications and reinterventions in the first two postoperative years.

Does loss to follow-up lead to an overestimation of treatment success? Findings from a spine surgery registry of over 15,000 patients.

PURPOSE: Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are integral to the assessment of treatment success, but loss to follow-up (attrition) may lead to bias in the results reported. We sought to evaluate the extent, nature and implications of attrition in a long-established, single-centre spine registry. METHODS: The registry contained the data of 15,264 consecutive spine surgery patients. PROMs included the Core Outcome Measures Index (COMI) and a rating of the Global Treatment Outcome (GTO) and Satisfaction with Care. Baseline characteristics associated with returning a 12-month PROM (= "responder") were analysed (logistic regression). The 3-month outcomes of 12-month responders versus 12-month non-responders were compared (ANOVA and Chi-square). RESULTS: In total, 14,758/15,264 (97%) patients (60 ± 17y; 46% men) had consented to the use of their registry data for research. Preoperative, 3-month post-operative and 12-month post-operative PROMs were returned by 91, 90 and 86%, respectively. Factors associated with being a 12-month responder included: greater age, born in the country of the study, no private/semi-private insurance, better baseline status (lower COMI score), fewer previous surgeries, less comorbidity and no perioperative medical complications. 12-month non-responders had shown significantly worse outcomes in their 3-month PROMs than had 12-month responders (respectively, 66% vs 80% good GTO ("treatment helped/helped a lot"); 77% vs 88% satisfied/very satisfied; and 49% vs 63% achieved MCIC on COMI). CONCLUSION: Although attrition in this cohort was relatively low, 12-month non-responders displayed distinctive characteristics and their early outcomes were significantly worse than those of 12-month responders. If loss to follow-up is not addressed, treatment success will likely be overestimated, with erroneously optimistic results being reported.

Association between sagittal alignment and loads at the adjacent segment in the fused spine: a combined clinical and musculoskeletal modeling study of 205 patients with adult spinal deformity.

PURPOSE: Sagittal malalignment is a risk factor for mechanical complications after surgery for adult spinal deformity (ASD). Spinal loads, modulated by sagittal alignment, may explain this relationship. The aims of this study were to investigate the relationships between: (1) postoperative changes in loads at the proximal segment and realignment, and (2) absolute postoperative loads and postoperative alignment measures. METHODS: A previously validated musculoskeletal model of the whole spine was applied to study a clinical sample of 205 patients with ASD. Based on clinical and radiographic data, pre-and postoperative patient-specific alignments were simulated to predict loads at the proximal segment adjacent to the spinal fusion. RESULTS: Weak-to-moderate associations were found between pre-to-postop changes in lumbar lordosis, LL (r = - 0.23, r = - 0.43; p < 0.001), global tilt, GT (r = 0.26, r = 0.38; p < 0.001) and the Global Alignment and Proportion score, GAP (r = 0.26, r = 0.37; p < 0.001), and changes in compressive and shear forces at the proximal segment. GAP score parameters, thoracic kyphosis measurements and the slope of upper instrumented vertebra were associated with changes in shear. In patients with T10-pelvis fusion, moderate-to-strong associations were found between postoperative sagittal alignment measures and compressive and shear loads, with GT showing the strongest correlations (r = 0.75, r = 0.73, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Spinal loads were estimated for patient-specific full spinal alignment profiles in a large cohort of patients with ASD pre-and postoperatively. Loads on the proximal segments were greater in association with sagittal malalignment and malorientation of proximal vertebra. Future work should explore whether they provide a causative mechanism explaining the associated risk of proximal junction complications.