Search

Study Design. A retrospective cohort study of a prospectively collected multicenter adult spinal deformity (ASD) database. Objective. The aim of this study was to compare staged procedures to same-day interventions and identify the optimal time interval between staged surgeries for the treatment of ASD. Background. Surgical intervention for ASD is an invasive and complex procedure that surgeons often elect to perform on different days (staging). Yet, there remains a paucity of literature on the timing and effects of the interval between stages. Materials and Methods. ASD patients with 2-year data undergoing an anterior/posterior (A/P) fusion to the ilium were included. Propensity score matching was performed for the number of levels fused, number of interbody devices, surgical approaches, number of osteotomies/three-column osteotomy, frailty, Oswestry Disability Index, Charlson Comorbidity Index, revisions, sagittal vertical axis, pelvic incidence--lumbar lordosis, and upper instrumented vertebrae to create balanced cohorts of same-day and staged surgical patients. Staged patients were stratified by intervening time-period between surgeries, using quartiles. Results. A total of 176 propensity score--matched patients were included. The median interval between A/P staged procedures was 3 days. Staged patients had greater operative time and lower intensive care unit stays postoperatively (P<0.05). At 2 years, staged compared with same-day showed a greater improvement in T1 slope --cervical lordosis, C2 sacral slope, and SRS-Schwab sagittal vertical axis (P<0.05). Staged patients had higher rates of minimal clinically important difference for 1-year SRS-Appearance and 2-year Physical Component Summary scores. Assessing different intervals of staging, patients at the 75th percentile interval showed greater improvement in 1-year SRS-Pain and SRS-Total postoperative as well as SRSActivity, Pain, Satisfaction, and Total scores (P<0.05) compared with patients in lower quartiles. Compared with the 25th percentile, patients reaching the 50th percentile interval were associated with increased odds of improvement in Global Alignment and Proportion score proportionality [9.3 (1.6-53.2), P=0.01]. Conclusions. This investigation is among the first to compare multicenter staged and same-day surgery A/P ASD patients fused to ilium using propensity matching. Staged procedures resulted in significant improvement radiographically, reduced intensive care unit admissions, and superior patient-reported outcomes compared with same-day procedures. An interval of at least 3 days between staged procedures is associated with superior outcomes in terms of Global Alignment and Proportion score proportionality. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]