Search

BackgroundMore sophisticated surgical techniques for correcting adult spinal deformity (ASD) have increased operative times, adding to physiologic stress on patients and increased complication incidence. This study aims to determine factors associated with operative time using a statistical learning algorithm.MethodsRetrospective review of a prospective multicenter database containing 837 patients undergoing long spinal fusions for ASD. Conditional inference decision trees identified factors associated with skin-to-skin operative time and cutoff points at which factors have a global effect. A conditional variable-importance table was constructed based on a nonreplacement sampling set of 2000 conditional inference trees. Means comparison for the top 15 variables at their respective significant cutoffs indicated effect sizes.ResultsIncluded: 544 surgical ASD patients (mean age: 58.0 years; fusion length 11.3 levels; operative time: 378 minutes). The strongest predictor for operative time was institution/surgeon. Center/surgeons, grouped by decision tree hierarchy, a and b were, on average, 2 hours faster than center/surgeons c-f, who were 43 minutes faster than centers g-j, all P < 0.001. The next most important predictors were, in order, approach (combined vs posterior increases time by 139 minutes, P < 0.001), levels fused (

BackgroundFor 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.ObjectiveThe 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.MethodsRetrospective 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.ResultsSeventy-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

IntroductionOsteotomies 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.MethodsPatients 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.Results137 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).ConclusionsCervical 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.

PurposeEvaluate the presence of new-onset cervical deformity (CD) in nonoperative adult spinal deformity (ASD) patients with extended follow-up, with consideration for predictors, prevalence, and impact on patient-reported outcomes.MethodsRetrospective review of a prospective nonoperative ASD cohort. New onset CD patients at 1- (CD-1Y) and 2-year (CD-2Y) follow-up were defined as displaying baseline cervical alignment. Univariate analyses determined differences in radiographic parameters and outcome scores of CD and maintained-cervical-alignment patients. Multivariate binary logistic regression models determined new-onset CD predictors.ResultsA total of 143 patients were included (mean age 54 years, mean body mass index 25.6 kg/m2, 86% female). Cervical deformity rate was 38.5% at baseline. New-onset CD incidence at 1- and 2-year follow-up was 30.0% and 41.7%, respectively. Global sagittal profile comparison of CD-1Y/CD-2Y versus maintained cervical alignment cases revealed no differences (P > .05) at any interval. Baseline C2-C7 sagittal vertical axis (SVA) was associated with increased new-onset CD risk at 1 (odds ratio [OR] 1.14, P = .025) and 2 years (OR 1.04, P = .032); prior spine surgical history was associated with CD risk at 1-year follow-up (OR 6.75, P = .047); baseline C2 slope was associated with increased CD risk at 2-year follow-up (OR 1.12, P = .041). CD development did not significantly impact health-related quality of life (P > .05).ConclusionsCervical deformity can manifest in nonoperative ASD patients: 30.0% at 1-year follow-up, and 41.7% at 2-year follow-up. Progressive CD manifested independently of thoracolumbar profile changes. Increased baseline C2-C7 SVA, C2 slope, and prior surgical history increased new-onset CD odds at 1 and 2 years.

BackgroundCervical deformity (CD) surgery has become increasingly more common and complex, which has also led to reoperations for complications such as distal junctional kyphosis (DJK). Cost-utility analysis has yet to be used to analyze CD revision surgery in relation to the cost-utility of primary CD surgeries. The aim of this study was to determine the cost-utility of revision surgery for CD correction.MethodsRetrospective review of a multicenter prospective CD database. CD was defined as at least one of the following: C2-C7 Cobb >10°, cervical lordosis (CL) >10°, cervical sagittal vertical axis (cSVA) >4 cm, chin-brow vertical angle (CBVA) >25°. Quality-adjusted life year (QALY) were calculated by EuroQol Five-Dimensions questionnaire (EQ-5D) and Neck Disability Index (NDI) mapped to SF-6D index and utilized a 3% discount rate to account for residual decline to life expectancy (men: 76.9 years, women: 81.6 years). Medicare reimbursement at 30 days assigned costs for index procedures (9+ level posterior fusion, 4-8 level posterior fusion with anterior fusion, 2-3 level posterior fusion with anterior fusion, 4-8 level anterior fusion) and revision fusions (2-3 level, 4-8 level, or 9+ level posterior refusion). Cost per QALY gained was calculated.ResultsEighty-nine CD patients were included (61.6 years, 65.2% female). CD correction for these patients involved a mean 7.7±3.7 levels fused, with 34% combined approach surgeries, 49% posterior-only and 17% anterior-only, 19.1% three-column osteotomy. Costs for index surgeries ranged from $20,001-55,205, with the average cost for this cohort of $44,318 and cost per QALY of $27,267. Eleven revision surgeries (mean levels fused 10.3) occurred up to 1-year, with an average cost of $41,510. Indications for revisions were DJK (5/11), neurologic impairment [4], infection [1], prominent/painful instrumentation [1]. Average QALYs gained was 1.62 per revision patient. Cost was $28,138 per QALY for reoperations.ConclusionsCD revisions had a cost of $28,138 per QALY, in addition to the $27,267 per QALY for primary CD surgeries. For primary CD patients, CD surgery has the potential to be cost effective, with the caveats that a patient livelihood extends long enough to have the benefits and durability of the surgery is maintained. Efforts in research and surgical technique development should emphasize minimization of reoperation causes just as DJK that significantly affect cost utility of these surgeries to bring cost-utility to an acceptable range.

BackgroundCurrent health-related quality of life (HRQL) metrics used to assess patient outcomes following surgical correction of cervical deformity (CD) are not deformity-specific and thus cannot capture all aspects of a patient's deformity and outcomes. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the sensitivity of different HRQL outcome measures in assessing CD patients' outcomes 1-year post-operatively.MethodsRetrospective review of prospective multi-center database. Inclusion criteria: CD patients ≥18 yrs with pre- and 1-year post-operative radiographs and HRQLs [modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association (mJOA), EuroQol five-dimensions (EQ-5D), neck disability index (NDI)]. Associations between changes in EQ5D and NDI with improvement at 1-year in mJOA scores were assessed by whether or not the patient met the minimum clinically important difference (MCID) as well as whether or not they improved by one or more categories (i.e., change from moderate to mild). Odds ratios reported with 95% confidence intervals.ResultsSixty-three CD patients were included (mean 62 y, 55.6% F). Average baseline NDI scores were 46.75, mJOA was 13.68, and EQ-5D 0.74. Overall baseline myelopathy breakdown: none-9.5%, mild-30.2%, moderate-42.9%, high-17.5%. At 1-year, 46% of patients improved in mJOA, 71.4% NDI, and 65.1% EQ-5D. 19% of patients met mJOA MCID, 44.4% NDI MCID, 19% EQ-5D MCID. One-point improvement in NDI increased the odds of mJOA improvement and reaching mJOA MCID (improvement: OR, 1.06, CI: 1.01-1.10, P=0.01; MCID: OR, 1.06, CI: 1.02-1.11, P=0.006). Improvement in EQ-5D by 0.1 increased the odds of improving in mJOA and reaching mJOA MCID at 1-year (improvement: OR, 3.85, CI: 1.51-9.76, P=0.005; MCID: OR, 3.88, CI: 1.52-9.88, P=0.005). While correlations exist between outcome measures, when modeling these outcomes while controlling for confounders including cSVA change, surgical invasiveness, age and CCI, these HRQLs were not strongly correlated.ConclusionsImprovements in functional outcomes, as defined by mJOA score, were correlated with changes in neck based disability and general health state, defined by NDI and EQ-5D respectively. In an adjusted model, however, these direct relationships were not maintained. A CD-specific HRQL might be more useful for surgeons in assessing patient outcomes using a single metric.

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.)

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.)

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.)

Background: The study is a retrospective review of a multi-institutional database, aiming to determine predictors of non-depressed, satisfied adult spinal deformity (ASD) patients with good self-image at 2-year follow-up (2Y). ASD significantly impacts a patients' psychological status. Following treatment, little is known about predictors of satisfied patients with high self-image and mental status., Methods: Inclusion: primary ASD pts >18 y/o with complete 2Y follow-up. Non-depressed [Short Form 36-mental component score (SF36-MCS) >42], satisfied patients (SRS22-satisfaction >3) with good self-image (SR22-self-image >3) at 2Y were isolated (happy). Happy and control patients were propensity-matched by baseline and 2Y leg pain, Charlson, frailty, and radiographic measures for the operative (OP) and non-operative cohorts (NOP). Health related quality of life (HRQL), surgical and radiographic metrics were compared. Regression models identified predictors of happy patients. Thresholds were calculated using area under the curve (AUC) and 95%CI., Results: Of 480 patients, 94 OP (happy: 47 vs. control: 47) and 92 NOP (46 each) reached inclusion. At baseline, groups had similar age, gender, Oswestry disability index (ODI) (OP: 39.13 vs. 37.49, NOP: 17.70 vs. 19.74) and SF36-physical component score (PCS) (OP: 33.51 vs. 35.04, NOP: 47.93 vs. 44.72). Despite similar (P>0.05) surgeries, length of stay (LOS), and radiographic outcomes between OP happy and control groups, happy had less peri-operative complications (31.9% vs. 57.4%, P=0.13), better 2Y ODI (17.77 vs. 29.98), SRS22 component, total, and SF36 scores (P<0.05). NOP happy patients also exhibited better 2Y ODI (13.24 vs. 22.09), SRS22 component, total, and SF36 scores (P<0.05). Baseline SRS-mental (OR: 2.199, AUC: 0.617, cutoff: 2.5) and ODI improvement (OR: 1.055, AUC: 0.717, cutoff: >12) predicted happy OP patients, while baseline SRS-self-image (OR: 5.195, AUC: 0.740, cutoff: 3.5) and ODI improvement (OR: 1.087, AUC: 0.683, cutoff: >9) predicted happy NOP patients., Conclusions: Baseline mental-status, self-image and ODI improvement significantly impact long-term happiness in ASD patients. Despite equivalent management and alignment outcomes, operative and non-operative happy patients had better 2Y disability scores. Management strategies aimed at improving baseline mental-status, perception-of-deformity, and maximizing ODI may optimize treatment outcomes., Competing Interests: Conflicts of Interest: E Klineberg (DePuy Synthes—consulting, Stryker—consulting, Springer—consulting, Trevana—consulting, AOSpine—honoraria, fellowship support, K2M—honoraria); V Lange (Nemaris—stock ownership, DePuy Synthes—teaching/speaking, Nuvasive—teaching/speaking, K2M—teaching/speaking, Medtronic—teaching/speaking, Nemaris—board of directors); F Schwab (Zimmer Biomet—speaking/teaching, consulting, royalties/patents, NuVasive—speaking/teaching, consulting, royalties/patents, K2M—speaking/teaching, consulting, royalties/patents, MSD—speaking/teaching, consulting, royalties/patents, Medicrea—speaking/teaching, consulting, Nemaris—board of directors, shareholder); PG Passias (Medicrea—consulting, SpineWave—consulting, Allosource—Scientific Advisory Board, Zimmer Biomet—teaching/speaking, Globus—teaching/speaking, CSRS—grant, Aesculap—research study). The other authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.