Search

Introduction: Osteotomies are commonly performed to correct sagittal malalignment in cervical deformity (CD). However, the risks and benefits of performing a major osteotomy for cervical deformity correction have been understudied. The objective of this retrospective cohort study was to investigate the risks and benefits of performing a major osteotomy for CD correction., Methods: Patients stratified based on major osteotomy (MAJ) or minor (MIN). Independent t -tests and Chi-squared tests were used to assess differences between MAJ and MIN. A sub-analysis compared patients with flexible versus rigid CL., Results: 137 CD patients were included (62 years, 65% F). 19.0% CD patients underwent a MAJ osteotomy. After propensity score matching for cSVA, 52 patients were included. About 19.0% CD patients underwent a MAJ osteotomy. MAJ patients had more minor complications ( P = 0.045), despite similar surgical outcomes as MIN. At 3M, MAJ and MIN patients had similar NDI, mJOA, and EQ5D scores, however by 1 year, MAJ patients reached MCID for NDI less than MIN patients ( P = 0.003). MAJ patients with rigid deformities had higher rates of complications (79% vs. 29%, P = 0.056) and were less likely to show improvement in NDI at 1 year (0.95 vs. 0.54, P = 0.027). Both groups had similar sagittal realignment at 1 year (all P > 0.05)., Conclusions: Cervical deformity patients who underwent a major osteotomy had similar clinical outcomes at 3-months but worse outcomes at 1-year as compared to minor osteotomies, likely due to differences in baseline deformity. Patients with rigid deformities who underwent a major osteotomy had higher complication rates and worse clinical improvement despite similar realignment at 1 year., Competing Interests: The International Spine Study Group (ISSG) is funded through research grants from DePuy Synthes and individual donations, and supported the current work., (Copyright: © 2021 Journal of Craniovertebral Junction and Spine.)

Background: For cervical deformity (CD) surgery, goals include realignment, improved patient quality of life, and improved clinical outcomes. There is limited research identifying patients most likely to achieve all three., Objective: The objective is to create a model predicting good 1-year postoperative realignment, quality of life, and clinical outcomes following CD surgery using baseline demographic, clinical, and radiographic factors., Methods: Retrospective review of a multicenter CD database. CD patients were defined as having one of the following radiographic criteria: Cervical sagittal vertical axis (cSVA) >4 cm, cervical kyphosis/scoliosis >10°° or chin-brow vertical angle >25°. The outcome assessed was whether a patient achieved both a good radiographic and clinical outcome. The primary analysis was stepwise regression models which generated a dataset-specific prediction model for achieving a good radiographic and clinical outcome. Model internal validation was achieved by bootstrapping and calculating the area under the curve (AUC) of the final model with 95% confidence intervals., Results: Seventy-three CD patients were included (61.8 years, 58.9% F). The final model predicting the achievement of a good overall outcome (radiographic and clinical) yielded an AUC of 73.5% and included the following baseline demographic, clinical, and radiographic factors: mild-moderate myelopathy (Modified Japanese Orthopedic Association >12), no pedicle subtraction osteotomy, no prior cervical spine surgery, posterior lowest instrumented vertebra (LIV) at T1 or above, thoracic kyphosis >33°°, T1 slope <16 and cSVA <20 mm., Conclusions: Achievement of a positive outcome in radiographic and clinical outcomes following surgical correction of CD can be predicted with high accuracy using a combination of demographic, clinical, radiographic, and surgical factors, with the top factors being baseline cSVA <20 mm, no prior cervical surgery, and posterior LIV at T1 or above., Competing Interests: There are no conflicts of interest., (Copyright: © 2021 Journal of Craniovertebral Junction and Spine.)

Background: Age-adjusted alignment targets in the context of distal junctional kyphosis (DJK) development have yet to be investigated. Our aim was to assess age-adjusted alignment targets, reciprocal changes, and role of lowest instrumented level orientation in DJK development in cervical deformity (CD) patients., Methods: CD patients were evaluated based on lowest fused level: cervical (C7 or above), upper thoracic (UT: T1-T6), and lower thoracic (LT: T7-T12). Age-adjusted alignment targets were calculated using published formulas for sagittal vertical axis (SVA), pelvic incidence-lumbar lordosis (PI-LL), pelvic tilt (PT), T1 pelvic angle (TPA), and LL-thoracic kyphosis (TK). Outcome measures were cervical and global alignment parameters: Cervical SVA (cSVA), cervical lordosis, C2 slope, C2-T3 angle, C2-T3 SVA, TS-CL, PI-LL, PT, and SVA. Subanalysis matched baseline PI to assess age-adjusted alignment between DJK and non-DJK., Results: Seventy-six CD patients included. By 1Y, 20 patients developed DJK. Non-DJK patients had 27% cervical lowest instrumented vertebra (LIV), 68% UT, and 5% LT. DJK patients had 25% cervical, 50% UT, and 25% LT. There were no baseline or 1Y differences for PI, PI-LL, SVA, TPA, or PT for actual and age-adjusted targets. DJK patients had worse baseline cSVA and more severe 1Y cSVA, C2-T3 SVA, and C2 slope ( P < 0.05). The distribution of over/under corrected patients and the offset between actual and ideal alignment for SVA, PT, TPA, PI-LL, and LL-TK were similar between DJK and non-DJK patients. DJK patients requiring reoperation had worse postoperative changes in all cervical parameters and trended toward larger offsets for global parameters., Conclusion: CD patients with severe baseline malalignment went on to develop postoperative DJK. Age-adjusted alignment targets did not capture differences in these populations, suggesting the need for cervical-specific goals., Competing Interests: There are no conflicts of interest., (Copyright: © 2021 Journal of Craniovertebral Junction and Spine.)

Background: Klippel-Feil syndrome (KFS) includes craniocervical anomalies, low posterior hairline, and brevicollis, with limited cervical range of motion; however, there remains no consensus on inheritance pattern. This study defines incidence, characterizes concurrent diagnoses, and examines trends in the presentation and management of KFS., Methods: This was a retrospective review of the Kid's Inpatient Database (KID) for KFSpatients aged 0-20 years from 2003 to 2012. Incidence was established using KID-supplied year and hospital-trend weights. Demographics and secondary diagnoses associated with KFS were evaluated. Comorbidities, anomalies, and procedure type trends from 2003 to 2012 were assessed for likelihood to increase among the years studied using ANOVA tests., Results: Eight hundred and fifty-eight KFS diagnoses (age: 9.49 years; 51.1% females) and 475 patients with congenital fusion (CF) (age: 8.33 years; 50.3% females) were analyzed. We identified an incidence rate of 1/21,587 discharges. Only 6.36% of KFS patients were diagnosed with Sprengel's deformity; 1.44% with congenital fusion. About 19.1% of KFS patients presented with another spinal abnormality and 34.0% presented with another neuromuscular anomaly. About 36.51% of KFS patients were diagnosed with a nonspinal or nonmusculoskeletal anomaly, with the most prevalent anomalies being of cardiac origin (12.95%). About 7.34% of KFS patients underwent anterior fusions, whereas 6.64% of KFS patients underwent posterior fusions. The average number of levels operated on was 4.99 with 8.28% receiving decompressions. Interbody devices were used in 2.45% of cases. The rate of fusions with <3 levels (7.46%) was comparable to that of 3 levels or greater (7.81%)., Conclusions: KFS patients were more likely to have other spinal abnormalities (19.1%) and nonnervous system abnormalities (13.63%). Compared to congenital fusions, KFS patients were more likely to have congenital abnormalities such as Sprengel's deformity. KFS patients are increasingly being treated with spinal fusion., Level of Evidence: III., Competing Interests: There are no conflicts of interest., (Copyright: © 2019 Journal of Craniovertebral Junction and Spine.)

Introduction: Correction of cervical deformity (CD) often involves different types of osteotomies to address sagittal malalignment. This study assessed the relationship between osteotomy grade and vertebral level on alignment and clinical outcomes., Methods: Retrospective review of a multi-center prospectively collected CD database. CD was defined as at least one of the following: C2-C7 Cobb >10°, cervical lordosis (CL) >10°, C2-C7 sagittal vertical axis (cSVA) >4 cm, and chin-brow vertical angle > 25°. Patients were evaluated for level and type of cervical osteotomy., Results: 86 CD patients were included (61.4 ± 10.6 years, 66.3% female, body mass index 29.1 kg/m 2 ). 141 osteotomies were in the cervical spine and 79 were in the thoracic spine. There were 19 major osteotomies performed, with 47% at T1. Patients with an osteotomy in the cervical spine improved in T1 slope minus CL (TS - CL), CL, and C2 slope (all P < 0.05). Patients with upper thoracic osteotomies improved in TS - CL, cSVA, C2-T3, C2-T3 sagittal vertical axis (SVA), and C2 slope (all P < 0.05). Minor osteotomies in the upper thoracic spine showed improvement in cSVA (63 mm to 49 mm, P = 0.022), C2-T3 ( P = 0.007), and SVA (-16 mm to 27 mm, P < 0.001). The greatest amount of C2-T3 angular change occurred for patients with a major osteotomy at T2 (39.1° change), then T3 (15.7°), C7 (16.9°°), and T1 (13.5°°). Patients with a major osteotomy in the upper thoracic spine showed similar radiographic changes from pre- to post-operative as patients with three or more minor osteotomies, although C2-T3 SVA trended toward greater improvement with a major osteotomy (-22.5 mm vs. +5.9 mm, P = 0.058) due to lever arm effect., Conclusions: CD patients undergoing osteotomies in the cervical and upper thoracic spine experienced improvement in TS--CL and C2 slope. In the upper thoracic spine, multiple minor osteotomies achieved similar alignment changes to major osteotomies at a single level, while a major osteotomy focused at T2 had the greatest overall impact in cervicothoracic and global alignment in CD patients., Competing Interests: There are no conflicts of interest., (Copyright: © 2019 Journal of Craniovertebral Junction and Spine.)