Factors Associated with the Maintenance of Cost-Effectiveness at 5 Years in Adult Spinal Deformity Corrective Surgery.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate factors associated with the long-term durability of cost-effectiveness (CE) in ASD patients. BACKGROUND: A substantial increase in costs associated with the surgical treatment for adult spinal deformity (ASD) has given precedence to scrutinize the value and utility it provides. METHODS: We included 327 operative ASD patients with 5-year (5 Y) follow-up. Published methods were used to determine costs based on CMS.gov definitions and were based on the average DRG reimbursement rates. Utility was calculated using quality-adjusted life-years (QALY) utilizing the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) converted to Short-Form Six-Dimension (SF-6D), with a 3% discount applied for its decline with life expectancy. The CE threshold of $150,000 was used for primary analysis. RESULTS: Major and minor complication rates were 11% and 47% respectively, with 26% undergoing reoperation by 5 Y. The mean cost associated with surgery was $91,095±$47,003, with a utility gain of 0.091±0.086 at 1Y, QALY gained at 2 Y of 0.171±0.183, and at 5 Y of 0.42±0.43. The cost per QALY at 2 Y was $414,885, which decreased to $142,058 at 5 Y.With the threshold of $150,000 for CE, 19% met CE at 2 Y and 56% at 5 Y. In those in which revision was avoided, 87% met cumulative CE till life expectancy. Controlling analysis depicted higher baseline CCI and pelvic tilt (PT) to be the strongest predictors for not maintaining durable CE to 5 Y (CCI OR: 1.821 [1.159-2.862], P=0.009) (PT OR: 1.079 [1.007-1.155], P=0.030). CONCLUSIONS: Most patients achieved cost-effectiveness after four years postoperatively, with 56% meeting at five years postoperatively. When revision was avoided, 87% of patients met cumulative cost-effectiveness till life expectancy. Mechanical complications were predictive of failure to achieve cost-effectiveness at 2 Y, while comorbidity burden and medical complications were at 5 Y.

Stronger association of objective physical metrics with baseline patient-reported outcome measures than preoperative standing sagittal parameters for adult spinal deformity patients.

OBJECTIVE: Sagittal alignment measured on standing radiography remains a fundamental component of surgical planning for adult spinal deformity (ASD). However, the relationship between classic sagittal alignment parameters and objective metrics, such as walking time (WT) and grip strength (GS), remains unknown. The objective of this work was to determine if ASD patients with worse baseline sagittal malalignment have worse objective physical metrics and if those metrics have a stronger relationship to patient-reported outcome metrics (PROMs) than standing alignment. METHODS: The authors conducted a retrospective review of a multicenter ASD cohort. ASD patients underwent baseline testing with the timed up-and-go 6-m walk test (seconds) and for GS (pounds). Baseline PROMs were surveyed, including Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS), Scoliosis Research Society (SRS)-22r, and Veterans RAND 12 (VR-12) scores. Standard spinopelvic measurements were obtained (sagittal vertical axis [SVA], pelvic tilt [PT], and mismatch between pelvic incidence and lumbar lordosis [PI-LL], and SRS-Schwab ASD classification). Univariate and multivariable linear regression modeling was performed to interrogate associations between objective physical metrics, sagittal parameters, and PROMs. RESULTS: In total, 494 patients were included, with mean ± SD age 61 ± 14 years, and 68% were female. Average WT was 11.2 ± 6.1 seconds and average GS was 56.6 ± 24.9 lbs. With increasing PT, PI-LL, and SVA quartiles, WT significantly increased (p < 0.05). SRS-Schwab type N patients demonstrated a significantly longer average WT (12.5 ± 6.2 seconds), and type T patients had a significantly shorter WT time (7.9 ± 2.7 seconds, p = 0.03). With increasing PT quartiles, GS significantly decreased (p < 0.05). SRS-Schwab type T patients had a significantly higher average GS (68.8 ± 27.8 lbs), and type L patients had a significantly lower average GS (51.6 ± 20.4 lbs, p = 0.03). In the frailty-adjusted multivariable linear regression analyses, WT was more strongly associated with PROMs than sagittal parameters. GS was more strongly associated with ODI and PROMIS Physical Function scores. CONCLUSIONS: The authors observed that increasing baseline sagittal malalignment is associated with slower WT, and possibly weaker GS, in ASD patients. WT has a stronger relationship to PROMs than standing alignment parameters. Objective physical metrics likely offer added value to standard spinopelvic measurements in ASD evaluation and surgical planning.

Are insufficient corrections a major factor in distal junctional kyphosis? A simulated analysis of cervical deformity correction using in-construct measurements.

OBJECTIVE: The present study utilized recently developed in-construct measurements in simulations of cervical deformity surgery in order to assess undercorrection and predict distal junctional kyphosis (DJK). METHODS: A retrospective review of a database of operative cervical deformity patients was analyzed for severe DJK and mild DJK. C2-lower instrumented vertebra (LIV) sagittal angle (SA) was measured postoperatively, and the correction was simulated in the preoperative radiograph in order to match the C2-LIV by using the planning software. Linear regression analysis that used C2 pelvic angle (CPA) and pelvic tilt (PT) determined the simulated PT that matched the virtual CPA. Linear regression analysis was used to determine the C2-T1 SA, C2-T4 SA, and C2-T10 SA that corresponded to DJK of 20° and cervical sagittal vertical axis (cSVA) of 40 mm. RESULTS: Sixty-nine cervical deformity patients were included. Severe and mild DJK occurred in 11 (16%) and 22 (32%) patients, respectively; 3 (4%) required DJK revision. Simulated corrections demonstrated that severe and mild DJK patients had worse alignment compared to non-DJK patients in terms of cSVA (42.5 mm vs 33.0 mm vs 23.4 mm, p < 0.001) and C2-LIV SVA (68.9 mm vs 57.3 mm vs 36.8 mm, p < 0.001). Linear regression revealed the relationships between in-construct measures (C2-T1 SA, C2-T4 SA, and C2-T10 SA), cSVA, and change in DJK (all R > 0.57, p < 0.001). A cSVA of 40 mm corresponded to C2-T4 SA of 10.4° and C2-T10 SA of 28.0°. A DJK angle change of 10° corresponded to C2-T4 SA of 5.8° and C2-T10 SA of 20.1°. CONCLUSIONS: Simulated cervical deformity corrections demonstrated that severe DJK patients have insufficient corrections compared to patients without DJK. In-construct measures assess sagittal alignment within the fusion separate from DJK and subjacent compensation. They can be useful as intraoperative tools to gauge the adequacy of cervical deformity correction.

Machine learning clustering of adult spinal deformity patients identifies four prognostic phenotypes: a multicenter prospective cohort analysis with single surgeon external validation.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Among adult spinal deformity (ASD) patients, heterogeneity in patient pathology, surgical expectations, baseline impairments, and frailty complicates comparisons in clinical outcomes and research. This study aims to qualitatively segment ASD patients using machine learning-based clustering on a large, multicenter, prospectively gathered ASD cohort. PURPOSE: To qualitatively segment adult spinal deformity patients using machine learning-based clustering on a large, multicenter, prospectively gathered cohort. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: Machine learning algorithm using patients from a prospective multicenter study and a validation cohort from a retrospective single center, single surgeon cohort with complete 2-year follow up. PATIENT SAMPLE: About 805 ASD patients; 563 patients from a prospective multicenter study and 242 from a single center to be used as a validation cohort. OUTCOME MEASURES: To validate and extend the Ames-ISSG/ESSG classification using machine learning-based clustering analysis on a large, complex, multicenter, prospectively gathered ASD cohort. METHODS: We analyzed a training cohort of 563 ASD patients from a prospective multicenter study and a validation cohort of 242 ASD patients from a retrospective single center/surgeon cohort with complete two-year patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and clinical/radiographic follow-up. Using k-means clustering, a machine learning algorithm, we clustered patients based on baseline PROs, Edmonton frailty, age, surgical history, and overall health. Baseline differences in clusters identified using the training cohort were assessed using Chi-Squared and ANOVA with pairwise comparisons. To evaluate the classification system's ability to discern postoperative trajectories, a second machine learning algorithm assigned the single-center/surgeon patients to the same 4 clusters, and we compared the clusters' two-year PROs and clinical outcomes. RESULTS: K-means clustering revealed four distinct phenotypes from the multicenter training cohort based on age, frailty, and mental health: Old/Frail/Content (OFC, 27.7%), Old/Frail/Distressed (OFD, 33.2%), Old/Resilient/Content (ORC, 27.2%), and Young/Resilient/Content (YRC, 11.9%). OFC and OFD clusters had the highest frailty scores (OFC: 3.76, OFD: 4.72) and a higher proportion of patients with prior thoracolumbar fusion (OFC: 47.4%, OFD: 49.2%). ORC and YRC clusters exhibited lower frailty scores and fewest patients with prior thoracolumbar procedures (ORC: 2.10, 36.6%; YRC: 0.84, 19.4%). OFC had 69.9% of patients with global sagittal deformity and the highest T1PA (29.0), while YRC had 70.2% exhibiting coronal deformity, the highest mean coronal Cobb Angle (54.0), and the lowest T1PA (11.9). OFD and ORC had similar alignment phenotypes with intermediate values for Coronal Cobb Angle (OFD: 33.7; ORC: 40.0) and T1PA (OFD: 24.9; ORC: 24.6) between OFC (worst sagittal alignment) and YRC (worst coronal alignment). In the single surgeon validation cohort, the OFC cluster experienced the greatest increase in SRS Function scores (1.34 points, 95%CI 1.01-1.67) compared to OFD (0.5 points, 95%CI 0.245-0.755), ORC (0.7 points, 95%CI 0.415-0.985), and YRC (0.24 points, 95%CI -0.024-0.504) clusters. OFD cluster patients improved the least over 2 years. Multivariable Cox regression analysis demonstrated that the OFD cohort had significantly worse reoperation outcomes compared to other clusters (HR: 3.303, 95%CI: 1.085-8.390). CONCLUSION: Machine-learning clustering found four different ASD patient qualitative phenotypes, defined by their age, frailty, physical functioning, and mental health upon presentation, which primarily determines their ability to improve their PROs following surgery. This reaffirms that these qualitative measures must be assessed in addition to the radiographic variables when counseling ASD patients regarding their expected surgical outcomes.

Predictors of pelvic tilt normalization: a multicenter study on the impact of regional and lower-extremity compensation on pelvic alignment after complex adult spinal deformity surgery.

OBJECTIVE: The objective was to determine the degree of regional decompensation to pelvic tilt (PT) normalization after complex adult spinal deformity (ASD) surgery. METHODS: Operative ASD patients with 1 year of PT measurements were included. Patients with normalized PT at baseline were excluded. Predicted PT was compared to actual PT, tested for change from baseline, and then compared against age-adjusted, Scoliosis Research Society-Schwab, and global alignment and proportion (GAP) scores. Lower-extremity (LE) parameters included the cranial-hip-sacrum angle, cranial-knee-sacrum angle, and cranial-ankle-sacrum angle. LE compensation was set as the 1-year upper tertile compared with intraoperative baseline. Univariate analyses were used to compare normalized and nonnormalized data against alignment outcomes. Multivariable logistic regression analyses were used to develop a model consisting of significant predictors for normalization related to regional compensation. RESULTS: In total, 156 patients met the inclusion criteria (mean ± SD age 64.6 ± 9.1 years, BMI 27.9 ± 5.6 kg/m2, Charlson Comorbidity Index 1.9 ± 1.6). Patients with normalized PT were more likely to have overcorrected pelvic incidence minus lumbar lordosis and sagittal vertical axis at 6 weeks (p < 0.05). GAP score at 6 weeks was greater for patients with nonnormalized PT (0.6 vs 1.3, p = 0.08). At baseline, 58.5% of patients had compensation in the thoracic and cervical regions. Postoperatively, compensation was maintained by 42% with no change after matching in age-adjusted or GAP score. The patients with nonnormalized PT had increased rates of thoracic and cervical compensation (p < 0.05). Compensation in thoracic kyphosis differed between patients with normalized PT at 6 weeks and those with normalized PT at 1 year (69% vs 35%, p < 0.05). Those who compensated had increased rates of implant complications by 1 year (OR [95% CI] 2.08 [1.32-6.56], p < 0.05). Cervical compensation was maintained at 6 weeks and 1 year (56% vs 43%, p = 0.12), with no difference in implant complications (OR 1.31 [95% CI -2.34 to 1.03], p = 0.09). For the lower extremities at baseline, 61% were compensating. Matching age-adjusted alignment did not eliminate compensation at any joint (all p > 0.05). Patients with nonnormalized PT had higher rates of LE compensation across joints (all p < 0.01). Overall, patients with normalized PT at 1 year had the greatest odds of resolving LE compensation (OR 9.6, p < 0.001). Patients with normalized PT at 1 year had lower rates of implant failure (8.9% vs 19.5%, p < 0.05), rod breakage (1.3% vs 13.8%, p < 0.05), and pseudarthrosis (0% vs 4.6%, p < 0.05) compared with patients with nonnormalized PT. The complication rate was significantly lower for patients with normalized PT at 1 year (56.7% vs 66.1%, p = 0.02), despite comparable health-related quality of life scores. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with PT normalization had greater rates of resolution in thoracic and LE compensation, leading to lower rates of complications by 1 year. Thus, consideration of both the lower extremities and thoracic regions in surgical planning is vital to preventing adverse outcomes and maintaining pelvic alignment.

Persistent Lower Extremity Compensation for Sagittal Imbalance After Surgical Correction of Complex Adult Spinal Deformity: A Radiographic Analysis of Early Impact.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Achieving spinopelvic realignment during adult spinal deformity (ASD) surgery does not always produce ideal outcomes. Little is known whether compensation in lower extremities (LEs) plays a role in this disassociation. The objective is to analyze lower extremity compensation after complex ASD surgery, its effect on outcomes, and whether correction can alleviate these mechanisms. METHODS: We included patients with complex ASD with 6-week data. LE parameters were as follows: sacrofemoral angle, knee flexion angle, and ankle flexion angle. Each parameter was ranked, and upper tertile was deemed compensation. Patients compensating and not compensating postoperatively were propensity score matched for body mass index, frailty, and T1 pelvic angle. Linear regression assessed correlation between LE parameters and baseline deformity, demographics, and surgical details. Multivariate analysis controlling for baseline deformity and history of total knee/hip arthroplasty evaluated outcomes. RESULTS: Two hundred and ten patients (age: 61.3 ± 14.1 years, body mass index: 27.4 ± 5.8 kg/m2, Charlson Comorbidity Index: 1.1 ± 1.6, 72% female, 22% previous total joint arthroplasty, 24% osteoporosis, levels fused: 13.1 ± 3.8) were included. At baseline, 59% were compensating in LE: 32% at hips, 39% knees, and 36% ankles. After correction, 61% were compensating at least one joint. Patients undercorrected postoperatively were less likely to relieve LE compensation (odds ratio: 0.2, P = .037). Patients compensating in LE were more often undercorrected in age-adjusted pelvic tilt, pelvic incidence, lumbar lordosis, and T1 pelvic angle and disproportioned in Global Alignment and Proportion (P < .05). Patients matched in sagittal age-adjusted score at 6 weeks but compensating in LE were more likely to develop proximal junctional kyphosis (odds ratio: 4.1, P = .009) and proximal junctional failure (8% vs 0%, P = .035) than those sagittal age-adjusted score-matched and not compensating in LE. CONCLUSION: Perioperative lower extremity compensation was a product of undercorrecting complex ASD. Even in age-adjusted realignment, compensation was associated with global undercorrection and junctional failure. Consideration of lower extremities during planning is vital to avoid adverse outcomes in perioperative course after complex ASD surgery.

Patient-specific Cervical Deformity Corrections With Consideration of Associated Risk: Establishment of Risk Benefit Thresholds for Invasiveness Based on Deformity and Frailty Severity.

STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: This was a retrospective cohort study. BACKGROUND: Little is known of the intersection between surgical invasiveness, cervical deformity (CD) severity, and frailty. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to investigate the outcomes of CD surgery by invasiveness, frailty status, and baseline magnitude of deformity. METHODS: This study included CD patients with 1-year follow-up. Patients stratified in high deformity if severe in the following criteria: T1 slope minus cervical lordosis, McGregor's slope, C2-C7, C2-T3, and C2 slope. Frailty scores categorized patients into not frail and frail. Patients are categorized by frailty and deformity (not frail/low deformity; not frail/high deformity; frail/low deformity; frail/high deformity). Logistic regression assessed increasing invasiveness and outcomes [distal junctional failure (DJF), reoperation]. Within frailty/deformity groups, decision tree analysis assessed thresholds for an invasiveness cutoff above which experiencing a reoperation, DJF or not achieving Good Clinical Outcome was more likely. RESULTS: A total of 115 patients were included. Frailty/deformity groups: 27% not frail/low deformity, 27% not frail/high deformity, 23.5% frail/low deformity, and 22.5% frail/high deformity. Logistic regression analysis found increasing invasiveness and occurrence of DJF [odds ratio (OR): 1.03, 95% CI: 1.01-1.05, P =0.002], and invasiveness increased with deformity severity ( P <0.05). Not frail/low deformity patients more often met Optimal Outcome with an invasiveness index <63 (OR: 27.2, 95% CI: 2.7-272.8, P =0.005). An invasiveness index <54 for the frail/low deformity group led to a higher likelihood of meeting the Optimal Outcome (OR: 9.6, 95% CI: 1.5-62.2, P =0.018). For the frail/high deformity group, patients with a score <63 had a higher likelihood of achieving Optimal Outcome (OR: 4.8, 95% CI: 1.1-25.8, P =0.033). There was no significant cutoff of invasiveness for the not frail/high deformity group. CONCLUSIONS: Our study correlated increased invasiveness in CD surgery to the risk of DJF, reoperation, and poor clinical success. The thresholds derived for deformity severity and frailty may enable surgeons to individualize the invasiveness of their procedures during surgical planning to account for the heightened risk of adverse events and minimize unfavorable outcomes.

Efficacy of Varying Surgical Approaches on Achieving Optimal Alignment in Adult Spinal Deformity Surgery.

BACKGROUND: The Roussouly, SRS-Schwab, and Global Alignment and Proportion (GAP) classifications define alignment by spinal shape and deformity severity. The efficacy of different surgical approaches and techniques to successfully achieve these goals is not well understood. PURPOSE: Identify the impact of surgical approach and/or technique on meeting complex realignment goals in adult spinal deformity (ASD) corrective surgery. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: Retrospective study. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Included patients with ASD fused to pelvis with 2-year data. Patients were categorized by: (1) Roussouly: matching current and theoretical spinal shapes, (2) improving in SRS-Schwab modifiers (0, +, ++), and (3) improving GAP proportionality by 2 years. Analysis of covariance and multivariable logistic regression analyses controlling for age, levels fused, baseline deformity, and 3-column osteotomy usage compared the effect of different surgical approaches, interbody, and osteotomy use on meeting realignment goals. RESULTS: A total of 693 patients with ASD were included. By surgical approach, 65.7% were posterior-only and 34.3% underwent anterior-posterior approach with 76% receiving an osteotomy (21.8% 3-column osteotomy). By 2 years, 34% matched Roussouly, 58% improved in GAP, 45% in SRS-Schwab pelvic tilt (PT), 62% sagittal vertical axis, and 70% pelvic incidence-lumbar lordosis. Combined approaches were most effective for improvement in PT [odds ratio (OR): 1.7 (1.1-2.5)] and GAP [OR: 2.2 (1.5-3.2)]. Specifically, anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) below L3 demonstrated higher rates of improvement versus TLIFs in Roussouly [OR: 1.7 (1.1-2.5)] and GAP [OR: 1.9 (1.3-2.7)]. Patients undergoing pedicle subtraction osteotomy at L3 or L4 were more likely to improve in PT [OR: 2.0 (1.0-5.2)] and pelvic incidence-lumbar lordosis [OR: 3.8 (1.4-9.8)]. Clinically, patients undergoing the combined approach demonstrated higher rates of meeting SCB in Oswestry Disability Index by 2 years while minimizing rates of proximal junctional failure, most often with an ALIF at L5-S1 [Oswestry Disability Index-SCB: OR: 1.4 (1.1-2.0); proximal junctional failure: OR: 0.4 (0.2-0.8)]. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients undergoing ASD realignment, optimal lumbar shape and proportion can be achieved more often with a combined approach. Although TLIFs, incorporating a 3-column osteotomy, at L3 and L4 can restore lordosis and normalize pelvic compensation, ALIFs at L5-S1 were most likely to achieve complex realignment goals with an added clinical benefit and mitigation of junctional failure.

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.

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%, p = 0.021) and major mechanical complications (12% vs. 22%, p = 0.002), and less reoperations (23% vs. 33%, p = 0.008). Adjusted analysis revealed O patients more often met MCID (minimal clinically important difference) in SF-36 PCS, SRS-22 Pain, and Appearance. Cost-utility-adjusted analysis determined that the O group generated better cost-utility by one year and maintained lower overall cost and costs per QALY (both p < 0.001) at two years. 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.

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.

Longitudinal Assessment of Modern Spine Surgery Training: 10-Year Follow-up of a Nationwide Survey of Residency and Spine Fellowship Program Directors.

Spine surgeons complete training through residency in orthopaedic surgery (ORTH) or neurosurgery (NSGY). A survey was conducted in 2013 to evaluate spine surgery training. Over the past decade, advances in surgical techniques and the changing dynamics in fellowship training may have affected training and program director (PD) perceptions may have shifted. Methods: This study is a cross-sectional survey distributed to all PDs of ORTH and NSGY residencies and spine fellowships in the United States. Participants were queried regarding characteristics of their program, ideal characteristics of residency training, and opinions regarding the current training environment. χ2 tests were used to compare answers over the years. Results: In total, 241 PDs completed the survey. From 2013 to 2023, NSGY increased the proportion of residents with >300 spine cases (86%-100%) while ORTH remained with >90% of residents with < 225 cases (p < 0.05). A greater number of NSGY PDs encouraged spine fellowship even for community spine surgery practice (0% in 2013 vs. 14% in 2023, p < 0.05), which continued to be significantly different from ORTH PDs (∼88% agreed, p > 0.05). 100% of NSGY PDs remained confident in their residents performing spine surgery, whereas ORTH confidence significantly decreased from 43% in 2013 to 25% in 2023 (p < 0.05). For spinal deformity, orthopaedic PDs (92%), NSGY PDs (96%), and fellowship directors (95%), all agreed that a spine fellowship should be pursued (p = 0.99). In both 2013 and 2023, approximately 44% were satisfied with the spine training model in the United States. In 2013, 24% of all PDs believed we should have a dedicated spine residency, which increased to 39% in 2023 (fellowship: 57%, ORTH: 38%, NSGY: 21%) (p < 0.05). Conclusion: Spine surgery training continues to evolve, yet ORTH and neurological surgery training remains significantly different in case volumes and educational strengths. In both 2013 and 2023, less than 50% of PDs were satisfied with the current spine surgery training model, and a growing minority believe that spine surgery should have its own residency training pathway. Level of Evidence: IV.

Predictive role of global spinopelvic alignment and upper instrumented vertebra level in symptomatic proximal junctional kyphosis in adult spinal deformity.

OBJECTIVE: The authors of this study sought to evaluate the predictive role of global sagittal alignment and upper instrumented vertebra (UIV) level in symptomatic proximal junctional kyphosis (PJK) among patients with adult spinal deformity (ASD). METHODS: Data on ASD patients who had undergone fusion of ≥ 5 vertebrae from 2008 to 2018 and with a minimum follow-up of 1 year were obtained from a prospectively collected multicenter database and evaluated (n = 1312). Radiographs were obtained preoperatively and at 6 weeks, 6 months, 1 year, 2 years, and 3 years postoperatively. The 22-Item Scoliosis Research Society Patient Questionnaire Revised (SRS-22r) scores were collected preoperatively, 1 year postoperatively, and 2 years postoperatively. Symptomatic PJK was defined as a kyphotic increase > 20° in the Cobb angle from the UIV to the UIV+2. At 6 weeks postoperatively, sagittal parameters were evaluated and patients were categorized by global alignment and proportion (GAP) score/category and SRS-Schwab sagittal modifiers. Patients were stratified by UIV level: upper thoracic (UT) UIV ≥ T8 or lower thoracic (LT) UIV ≤ T9. RESULTS: Patients who developed symptomatic PJK (n = 260) had worse 1-year postoperative SRS-22r mental health (3.70 vs 3.86) and total (3.56 vs 3.67) scores, as well as worse 2-year postoperative self-image (3.45 vs 3.65) and satisfaction (4.03 vs 4.22) scores (all p ≤ 0.04). In the whole study cohort, patients with PJK had less pelvic incidence-lumbar lordosis (PI-LL) mismatch (-0.24° vs 3.29°, p < 0.001) but no difference in their GAP score/category or SRS-Schwab sagittal modifiers compared with the patients without PJK. Regression showed a higher risk of PJK with a pelvic tilt (PT) grade ++ (OR 2.35) and less risk with a PI-LL grade ++ (OR 0.35; both p < 0.01). When specifically analyzing the LT UIV cohort, patients with PJK had a higher GAP score (5.66 vs 4.79), greater PT (23.02° vs 20.90°), and less PI-LL mismatch (1.61° vs 4.45°; all p ≤ 0.02). PJK patients were less likely to be proportioned postoperatively (17.6% vs 30.0%, p = 0.015), and regression demonstrated a greater PJK risk with severe disproportion (OR 1.98) and a PT grade ++ (OR 3.15) but less risk with a PI-LL grade ++ (OR 0.45; all p ≤ 0.01). When specifically evaluating the UT UIV cohort, the PJK patients had less PI-LL mismatch (-2.11° vs 1.45°) but no difference in their GAP score/category. Regression showed a greater PJK risk with a PT grade + (OR 1.58) and a decreased risk with a PI-LL grade ++ (OR 0.21; both p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Symptomatic PJK leads to worse patient-reported outcomes and is associated with less postoperative PI-LL mismatch and greater postoperative PT. A worse postoperative GAP score and disproportion are only predictive of symptomatic PJK in patients with an LT UIV.

Height Gain Following Correction of Adult Spinal Deformity.

BACKGROUND: Height gain following a surgical procedure for patients with adult spinal deformity (ASD) is incompletely understood, and it is unknown if height gain correlates with patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study of patients undergoing ASD surgery. Patients with baseline, 6-week, and subanalysis of 1-year postoperative full-body radiographic and PROM data were examined. Correlation analysis examined relationships between vertical height differences and PROMs. Regression analysis was utilized to preoperatively estimate T1-S1 and S1-ankle height changes. RESULTS: This study included 198 patients (mean age, 57 years; 69% female); 147 patients (74%) gained height. Patients with height loss, compared with those who gained height, experienced greater increases in thoracolumbar kyphosis (2.81° compared with -7.37°; p < 0.001) and thoracic kyphosis (12.96° compared with 4.42°; p = 0.003). For patients with height gain, sagittal and coronal alignment improved from baseline to postoperatively: 25° to 21° for pelvic tilt (PT), 14° to 3° for pelvic incidence - lumbar lordosis (PI-LL), and 60 mm to 17 mm for sagittal vertical axis (SVA) (all p < 0.001). The full-body mean height gain was 7.6 cm, distributed as follows: sella turcica-C2, 2.9 mm; C2-T1, 2.8 mm; T1-S1 (trunk gain), 3.8 cm; and S1-ankle (lower-extremity gain), 3.3 cm (p < 0.001). T1-S1 height gain correlated with the thoracic Cobb angle correction and the maximum Cobb angle correction (p = 0.002). S1-ankle height gain correlated with the corrections in PT, PI-LL, and SVA (p < 0.001). T1-ankle height gain correlated with the corrections in PT (p < 0.001) and SVA (p = 0.03). Trunk height gain correlated with improved Scoliosis Research Society (SRS-22r) Appearance scores (r = 0.20; p = 0.02). Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Depression scores correlated with S1-ankle height gain (r = -0.19; p = 0.03) and C2-T1 height gain (r = -0.18; p = 0.04). A 1° correction in a thoracic scoliosis Cobb angle corresponded to a 0.2-mm height gain, and a 1° correction in a thoracolumbar scoliosis Cobb angle resulted in a 0.25-mm height gain. A 1° improvement in PI-LL resulted in a 0.2-mm height gain. CONCLUSIONS: Most patients undergoing ASD surgery experienced height gain following deformity correction, with a mean full-body height gain of 7.6 cm. Height gain can be estimated preoperatively with predictive ratios, and height gain was correlated with improvements in reported SRS-22r appearance and PROMIS scores. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level III . See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Use of multiple rods and proximal junctional kyphosis in adult spinal deformity surgery.

OBJECTIVE: Multiple rods are utilized in adult spinal deformity (ASD) surgery to increase construct stiffness. However, the impact of multiple rods on proximal junctional kyphosis (PJK) is not well established. This study aimed to investigate the impact of multiple rods on PJK incidence in ASD patients. METHODS: ASD patients from a prospective multicenter database with a minimum follow-up of 1 year were retrospectively reviewed. Clinical and radiographic data were collected preoperatively, at 6 weeks postoperatively, at 6 months postoperatively, at 1 year postoperatively, and at every subsequent year postoperatively. PJK was defined as a kyphotic increase of > 10° in the Cobb angle from the upper instrumented vertebra (UIV) to UIV+2 as compared with preoperative values. Demographic data, radiographic parameters, and PJK incidence were compared between the multirod and dual-rod patient cohorts. PJK-free survival analysis was performed using Cox regression to control for demographic characteristics, comorbidities, level of fusion, and radiographic parameters. RESULTS: Overall, 307/1300 (23.62%) cases utilized multiple rods. Cases with multiple rods were more likely to be revisions (68.4% vs 46.5%, p < 0.001), to be posterior only (80.7% vs 61.5%, p < 0.001), involve more levels of fusion (mean 11.73 vs 10.60, p < 0.001), and include 3-column osteotomy (42.9% vs 17.1%, p < 0.001). Patients with multiple rods also had greater preoperative pelvic retroversion (mean pelvic tilt 27.95° vs 23.58°, p < 0.001), greater thoracolumbar junction kyphosis (-15.9° vs -11.9°, p = 0.001), and more severe sagittal malalignment (C7-S1 sagittal vertical axis 99.76 mm vs 62.23 mm, p < 0.001), all of which corrected postoperatively. Patients with multiple rods had similar incidence rates of PJK (58.6% vs 58.1%) and revision surgery (13.0% vs 17.7%). The PJK-free survival analysis demonstrated equivalent PJK-free survival durations among the patients with multiple rods (HR 0.889, 95% CI 0.745-1.062, p = 0.195) after controlling for demographic and radiographic parameters. Further stratification based on implant metal type demonstrated noninferior PJK incidence rates with multiple rods in the titanium (57.1% vs 54.6%, p = 0.858), cobalt chrome (60.5% vs 58.7%, p = 0.646), and stainless steel (20% vs 63.7%, p = 0.008) cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: Multirod constructs for ASD are most frequently utilized in revision, long-level reconstructions with 3-column osteotomy. The use of multiple rods in ASD surgery does not result in an increased incidence of PJK and is not affected by rod metal type.

Calibration of a comprehensive predictive model for the development of proximal junctional kyphosis and failure in adult spinal deformity patients with consideration of contemporary goals and techniques.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to calibrate an updated predictive model incorporating novel clinical, radiographic, and prophylactic measures to assess the risk of proximal junctional kyphosis (PJK) and failure (PJF). METHODS: Operative patients with adult spinal deformity (ASD) and baseline and 2-year postoperative data were included. PJK was defined as ≥ 10° in sagittal Cobb angle between the inferior uppermost instrumented vertebra (UIV) endplate and superior endplate of the UIV + 2 vertebrae. PJF was radiographically defined as a proximal junctional sagittal Cobb angle ≥ 15° with the presence of structural failure and/or mechanical instability, or PJK with reoperation. Backstep conditional binary supervised learning models assessed baseline demographic, clinical, and surgical information to predict the occurrence of PJK and PJF. Internal cross validation of the model was performed via a 70%/30% cohort split. Conditional inference tree analysis determined thresholds at an alpha level of 0.05. RESULTS: Seven hundred seventy-nine patients with ASD (mean 59.87 ± 14.24 years, 78% female, mean BMI 27.78 ± 6.02 kg/m2, mean Charlson Comorbidity Index 1.74 ± 1.71) were included. PJK developed in 50.2% of patients, and 10.5% developed PJF by their last recorded visit. The six most significant demographic, radiographic, surgical, and postoperative predictors of PJK/PJF were baseline age ≥ 74 years, baseline sagittal age-adjusted score (SAAS) T1 pelvic angle modifier > 1, baseline SAAS pelvic tilt modifier > 0, levels fused > 10, nonuse of prophylaxis measures, and 6-week SAAS pelvic incidence minus lumbar lordosis modifier > 1 (all p < 0.015). Overall, the model was deemed significant (p < 0.001), and internally validated receiver operating characteristic analysis returned an area under the curve of 0.923, indicating robust model fit. CONCLUSIONS: PJK and PJF remain critical concerns in ASD surgery, and efforts to reduce the occurrence of PJK and PJF have resulted in the development of novel prophylactic techniques and enhanced clinical and radiographic selection criteria. This study demonstrates a validated model incorporating such techniques that may allow for the prediction of clinically significant PJK and PJF, and thus assist in optimizing patient selection, enhancing intraoperative decision making, and reducing postoperative complications in ASD surgery.

Treatment of adult deformity surgery by orthopedic and neurological surgeons: trends in treatment, techniques, and costs by specialty.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Surgery to correct adult spinal deformity (ASD) is performed by both neurological surgeons and orthopedic surgeons. Despite well-documented high costs and complication rates following ASD surgery, there is a dearth of research investigating trends in treatment according to surgeon subspeciality. PURPOSE: The purpose of this investigation was to perform an analysis of surgical trends, costs and complications of ASD operations by physician specialty using a large, nationwide sample. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: Retrospective cohort study using an administrative claims database. PATIENT SAMPLE: A total of 12,929 patients were identified with ASD that underwent deformity surgery performed by neurological or orthopedic surgeons. OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was surgical case volume by surgeon specialty. Secondary outcomes included costs, medical complications, surgical complications, and reoperation rates (30-day, 1-year, 5-year, and total). METHODS: The PearlDiver Mariner database was queried to identify patients who underwent ASD correction from 2010 to 2019. The cohort was stratified to identify patients who were treated by either orthopedic or neurological surgeons. Surgical volume, baseline characteristics, and surgical techniques were examined between cohorts. Multivariable logistic regression was employed to assess the cost, rate of reoperation and complication according to each subspecialty while controlling for number of levels fused, rate of pelvic fixation, age, gender, region and Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI). Alpha was set to 0.05 and a Bonferroni correction for multiple comparisons was utilized to set the significance threshold at p ≤.000521. RESULTS: A total of 12,929 ASD patients underwent deformity surgery performed by neurological or orthopedic surgeons. Orthopedic surgeons performed most deformity procedures accounting for 64.57% (8,866/12,929) of all ASD operations, while the proportion treated by neurological surgeons increased 44.2% over the decade (2010: 24.39% vs 2019: 35.16%; p<.0005). Neurological surgeons more frequently operated on older patients (60.52 vs 55.18 years, p<.0005) with more medical comorbidities (CCI scores: 2.01 vs 1.47, p<.0005). Neurological surgeons also performed higher rates of arthrodesis between one and six levels (OR: 1.86, p<.0005), three column osteotomies (OR: 1.35, p<.0005) and navigated or robotic procedures (OR: 3.30, p<.0005). Procedures performed by orthopedic surgeons had significantly lower average costs as compared to neurological surgeons (orthopedic surgeons: $17,971.66 vs neurological surgeons: $22,322.64, p=.253). Adjusted logistic regression controlling for number of levels fused, pelvic fixation, age, sex, region, and comorbidities revealed that patients within neurosurgical care had similar odds of complications to orthopaedic surgery. CONCLUSIONS: This investigation of over 12,000 ASD patients demonstrates orthopedic surgeons continue to perform the majority of ASD correction surgery, although neurological surgeons are performing an increasingly larger percentage over time with a 44% increase in the proportion of surgeries performed in the decade. In this cohort, neurological surgeons more frequently operated on older and more comorbid patients, utilizing shorter-segment fixation with greater use of navigation and robotic assistance.

Incremental benefits of circumferential minimally invasive surgery for increasingly frail patients with adult spinal deformity.

OBJECTIVE: Circumferential minimally invasive surgery (cMIS) may provide incremental benefits compared with open surgery for patients with increasing frailty status by decreasing peri- and postoperative complications. METHODS: Operative patients with adult spinal deformity (ASD) ≥ 18 years old with baseline and 2-year postoperative data were assessed. With propensity score matching, patients who underwent cMIS (cMIS group) were matched with similar patients who underwent open surgery (open group) based on baseline BMI, C7-S1 sagittal vertical axis, pelvic incidence to lumbar lordosis mismatch, and S1 pelvic tilt. The Passias modified ASD frailty index (mASD-FI) was used to determine patient frailty stratification as not frail, frail, or severely frail. Baseline and postoperative factors were assessed using two-way analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) and multivariate ANCOVA while controlling for baseline age, Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) score, and number of levels fused. RESULTS: After propensity score matching, 170 ASD patients (mean age 62.71 ± 13.64 years, 75.0% female, mean BMI 29.25 ± 6.60 kg/m2) were included, split evenly between the cMIS and open groups. Surgically, patients in the open group had higher numbers of posterior levels fused (p = 0.021) and were more likely to undergo three-column osteotomies (p > 0.05). Perioperatively, cMIS patients had lower intraoperative blood loss and decreased use of cell saver across frailty groups (with adjustment for baseline age, CCI score, and levels fused), as well as fewer perioperative complications (p < 0.001). Adjusted analysis also revealed that compared to open patients, increasingly frail patients in the cMIS group were also more likely to demonstrate greater improvement in 1- and 2-year postoperative scores for the Oswestry Disability Index, SRS-36 (total), EQ-5D and SF-36 (all p < 0.05). With regard to postoperative complications, increasingly frail patients in the cMIS group were also noted to experience significantly fewer complications overall (p = 0.036) and fewer major intraoperative complications (p = 0.039). The cMIS patients were also less likely to need a reoperation than their open group counterparts (p = 0.043). CONCLUSIONS: Surgery performed with a cMIS technique may offer acceptable outcomes, with diminishment of perioperative complications and mitigation of catastrophic outcomes, in increasingly frail patients who may not be candidates for surgery using traditional open techniques. However, further studies should be performed to investigate the long-term impact of less optimal alignment in this population.

Preliminary experience with a novel facet-based lateral mass drill guide for the placement of lateral mass screws compared to freehand technique: a cadaveric study.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Lateral mass screw fixation is the standard for posterior subaxial cervical fixation. Several freehand surgical techniques for placing lateral mass screws have been described which rely on anatomical landmarks and surgeon mastery of the technique to safely place screws. The accuracy of these freehand techniques is inherently variable and can be influenced by a surgeon's level of clinical experience. A novel technique was developed that utilizes the plane of the facet joint to create lateral mass screw pilot holes parallel with the joint line to improve the safety and accuracy of lateral mass screw placement regardless of experience. PURPOSE: To assess the safety and accuracy of lateral mass screw placement using a novel lateral mass drill guide instrument (LM Guide), compared to standard freehand technique. STUDY DESIGN: Randomized cadaveric study utilizing multiple surgeon evaluators to compare the safety and accuracy of guided cervical lateral mass placement compared to traditional freehand techniques. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Lateral mass screws were placed from C3 to C7 in 20 cadaver specimens by 8 spine surgeons of varying levels of clinical experience (4 attendings, 4 fellows). Screws were placed bilaterally using standard anatomic landmarks ("freehand") randomly allocated on one side and using the LM Guide on the other. Cadaveric specimens were imaged with high-resolution CT to assess screw placement. Zone grading for safety was conducted based on screw tip position and clinical severity of screw breach was based on proximity to surrounding neurovascular anatomy. Screws were graded as safe, at-risk, or critical, with at-risk and critical screws considered malpositioned. To assess the accuracy of screw trajectory placed using the LM Guide compared to freehand, sagittal screw angle was measured and compared to an "ideal" screw path parallel to the facet joint line. Freehand and LM Guide groups were compared using Pearson's chi-square correlation. RESULTS: Screw placement using the LM guide yielded a significantly lower rate of screw malpositioning, with 7 of 91 (7.7%) compared with 18 of 99 (18.2%) screws placed in the At-Risk or Critical Zones, p<.05. Of the 91 screws inserted using the LM Guide, 84 (92.3%) were in the Safe Zone, 7 (7.7%) were At-Risk, and 0 were in Critical zones. There was no incidence of neural or transverse foramen breaches with the LM Guide. In comparison, for the 99 screws inserted freehand, 81 (81.8%) were Safe, 14 (14.1%) were At-Risk, and 4 (4.1%) were in Critical zones. The 4 Critical zone freehand screw breaches included 1 neural foramen breach, 2 transverse foramen breaches, and 1 facet breach. The LM Guide also resulted in higher accuracy of screw trajectory, as indicated by a significant reduction in sagittal screw angle compared with freehand, p<.01. Notably, in the less-experienced surgeon cohort, the LM Guide significantly reduced the sagittal screw angle and resulted in no critical screw breaches compared to 3 critical breaches with freehand technique suggesting there might be a benefit in decreasing the learning curve associated with lateral mass screw placement. CONCLUSIONS: Lateral mass screw placement with a novel LM Guide that uses the facet joint to control screw trajectory improved the accuracy and reproducibility of screw placement with a significant reduction in screw breach rate and sagittal screw angle compared to freehand techniques regardless of surgeon experience level. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: The inherent variability of freehand lateral mass screw placement can increase the risk of clinical complications associated with screw malpositioning. The technique presented in this cadaveric study may be a viable alternative to standard freehand technique that can improve the overall safety of lateral mass screw placement.

Pelvic Nonresponse Following Treatment of Adult Spinal Deformity: Influence of Realignment Strategies on Occurrence.

PURPOSE: Despite adequate correction, the pelvis may fail to readjust, deemed pelvic nonresponse (PNR). To assess alignment outcomes [PNR, proximal junctional kyphosis (PJK), postoperative cervical deformity (CD)] following adult spinal deformity (ASD) surgery utilizing different realignment strategies. MATERIALS AND METHODS: ASD patients with two-year data were included. PNR defined as undercorrected in age-adjusted pelvic tilt (PT) at six weeks and maintained at two years. Patients classified by alignment utilities: (a) improvement in Scoliosis Research Society-Schwab sagittal vertical axis, (b) matching in age-adjusted pelvic incidence-lumbar lordosis, (c) matching in Roussouly, (d) aligning Global Alignment and Proportionality (GAP) score. Multivariable regression analyses, controlling for age, baseline deformity, and surgical factors, assessed rates of PNR, PJK, and CD development following realignment. RESULTS: A total of 686 patients met the inclusion criteria. Rates of postoperative PJK and CD were not significant in the PNR group (both P >0.15). PNR patients less often met substantial clinical benefit in Oswestry Disability Index by two years [odds ratio: 0.6 (0.4-0.98)]. Patients overcorrected in age-adjusted pelvic incidence-lumbar lordosis, matching Roussouly, or proportioned in GAP at six weeks had lower rates of PNR (all P <0.001). Incremental addition of classifications led to 0% occurrence of PNR, PJK, and CD. Stratifying by baseline PT severity, Low and moderate deformity demonstrated the least incidence of PNR (7.7%) when proportioning in GAP at six weeks, while severe PT benefited most from matching in Roussouly (all P <0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Following ASD corrective surgery, 24.9% of patients showed residual pelvic malalignment. This occurrence was often accompanied by undercorrection of lumbopelvic mismatch and less improvement of pain. However, overcorrection in any strategy incurred higher rates of PJK. We recommend surgeons identify a middle ground using one, or more, of the available classifications to inform correction goals in this regard. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.