Two-Level Pedicle Subtraction Osteotomy in Lateral Position for an Ankylosing Spondylitis Patient With Severe Thoracolumbar Kyphosis and Hip Flexion Contracture: A Case Report.

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND AND IMPORTANCE Spinal osteotomy and total hip replacement (THR) are the most common surgical interventions for ankylosing spondylitis (AS). It is recommended that patients with AS with severe thoracolumbar kyphotic deformity (TLKD) and flexed hips receive spinal osteotomy before THR to reduce the risk of hip prosthesis dislocation after THR. Standardly, spinal osteotomy is performed in the prone position; however, it is impractical to place patients with AS with kyphosis and closed hips in a prone position. In this report, we present an AS case with severe TLKD and closed hips who underwent spinal osteotomy in a lateral position first, then THR in the second stage. CLINICAL PRESENTATION The patient with AS was a 40-year-old woamn with severe TLKD and a closed hip. Back pain, difficulty walking, and gaze loss are the chief complaints. In consideration of the infeasibility of adopting the prone position, the patient was placed in a lateral position and underwent 2-level pedicle subtraction osteotomy at L1 and L3 with a long instrumentation from T10 to S1 at the first stage. Then, THR was performed at the second stage. The patient achieved pain relief, horizontal gaze, and nearly normal ambulation after spinal deformity correction and THR. After 2-year follow-up, the spinal alignment remains good and hip function was satisfactory. DISCUSSION: The sequence of spinal osteotomy and THR performed for AS patients with TLKD and hip flexion contracture remains inconclusive. According to previous studies, patients treated with THR under a sagittal malaligned spine may require revision of the acetabular component to accommodate to the re-orientated acetabula resulting from the subsequent spinal osteotomy and realignment. Thus, we believe it is more reasonable to perform spinal osteotomy first. For osteotomy in lateral position, one of the key points is that the operation table should be tilted away from the surgeon side at a certain angle. Another point is that contralateral cancellous bone should be removed as much as possible when performing osteotomy at the side of vertebral away from the table. The satisfactory outcomes of this case revealed the feasibility of osteotomy in a lateral position for such severe AS with closed hip. CONCLUSION: Performing double-level spinal osteotomy in a lateral position first could be an alternative for patients with AS who cannot be placed in the prone position because of the severe deformity of the spine and hips.