Search

Background: Although children <5 years old in sub-Saharan Africa are vulnerable to both malaria and influenza, little is known about coinfection.Methods: This retrospective, cross-sectional study in rural western Kenya examined outpatient visits and hospitalizations associated with febrile acute respiratory illness (ARI) during a 2-year period (July 2009-June 2011) in children <5 years old.Results: Across sites, 45% (149/331) of influenza-positive patients were coinfected with malaria, whereas only 6% (149/2408) of malaria-positive patients were coinfected with influenza. Depending on age, coinfection was present in 4%-8% of outpatient visits and 1%-3% of inpatient admissions for febrile ARI. Children with influenza were less likely than those without to have malaria (risk ratio [RR], 0.57-0.76 across sites and ages), and children with malaria were less likely than those without to have influenza (RR, 0.36-0.63). Among coinfected children aged 24-59 months, hospital length of stay was 2.7 and 2.8 days longer than influenza-only-infected children at the 2 sites, and 1.3 and 3.1 days longer than those with malaria only (all P < .01).Conclusions: Coinfection with malaria and influenza was uncommon but associated with longer hospitalization than single infections among children 24-59 months of age. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

STUDY DESIGN: This is a clinic-based cross-sectional study involving 2 health-related quality-of-life (HRQL) questionnaires. OBJECTIVES: To compare the score distribution and reliability of the spinal deformity specific Scoliosis Research Society-22r (SRS-22r) questionnaire and the established generic Child Health Questionnaire-CF87 (CHQ-CF87), and to assess the concurrent validity of the SRS-22r using the CHQ-CF87 in an adolescent spine deformity population. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Different questionnaires are commonly thought to be necessary to assess the HRQL of adolescent and adult populations. But since spinal deformities usually begin in the second decade of life, longitudinal follow-up with the same HRQL is desirable. The SRS-22r HRQL has recently been validated for score distribution and internal consistency in a spinal deformity population ranging in age from 7 to 78 years. METHODS: The SRS-22r and CHQ-CF87 HRQLs were completed by 70 orthopedic spinal deformity outpatients 8 to 18 years of age, of whom 54 returned mailed retest questionnaires at an average of 24 days later. RESULTS: The ceiling effect averaged 27% for the SRS-22r and 36% for the CHQ-CF87. Respective values for internal consistency (Cronbach alpha) were 0.81 and 0.82, and for test-retest reproducibility the intraclass correlations (ICC) were 0.73 and 0.61. Concurrent validity was r > or = 0.68 or more for relevant function, pain, and mental health domains. The SRS Self-Image and particularly the Satisfaction/Dissatisfaction with Management domains did not correlate well with any CHQ-CF87 domains (r = 0.50 and 0.30, respectively). CONCLUSION: In a spinal deformity population 8 to 18 years of age, the score distribution and reliability, internal consistency, and reproducibility of the SRS-22r were at least as good as the CHQ-CF87. The SRS-22r function, pain, and mental health domains were concurrently valid in comparison to relevant CHQ-CF87 domains, but the SRS-22r self-image and satisfaction/dissatisfaction domains were not, thereby providing health-related quality-of-life information not provided for by the CHQ-CF87. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

STUDY DESIGN.: Cross-sectional mail questionnaire. OBJECTIVE.: Assess the feasibility of translating total and domain scores from Scoliosis Research Society (SRS)-24, SRS-23, and SRS-22 to SRS-22r. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA.: Three successive editions of the original SRS-24 health-related quality-of-life questionnaire have resulted from efforts to improve its psychometric properties and validate its use in patients down to 10 years of age. This resulted in the need to establish, if possible, conversion equations to the last and most thoroughly validated version, SRS-22r. METHODS.: A consolidated questionnaire of 49 questions that incorporated the various questions in the four questionnaires was mailed to a consecutive series of 235 patients who had received primary posterior or anterior instrumentation and arthrodesis to treat adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Regression modeling was used to establish conversion equations from the SRS-24, SRS-23, and SRS-22 to the SRS-22r. RESULTS.: One hundred twenty-one of the 235 patients (51%), aged 23.3 ± 4.52 years (range 14.2-34.6 years), returned the questionnaire at 8.6 ± 4.00 years (range 2.3-15.9 years) following surgery. Estimation of SRS-22r questionnaire and nonmanagement domains total scores and mean scores from SRS-22 and SRS-23 scores is excellent (R scores of 0.97-0.99) and good for SRS-24 scores (R scores of 0.80-0.82, improving to 0.86 and 0.87 after minimal domain reconfiguration). Estimation of SRS-22r individual domain total scores and mean scores from SRS-22 and SRS-23 is good to excellent (R scores of 0.81-0.99). Minimal domain reconfiguration improves conversion from SRS-24 pain from R = 0.71 to 0.76, which are both fair; SRS-24 function from R = 0.69 and 0.74 to 0.83, from poor and fair to good; and SRS-24 satisfaction/dissatisfaction with management from R = 0.64 to 0.80, from poor to good. Conversion of SRS-24 self-image is poor (R = 0.60) despite the correlation being statistically significant. CONCLUSION.: With one exception, SRS-24, SRS-23, and SRS-22 questionnaire, nonmanagement domains, and individual domain total scores and mean scores can be translated to SRS-22r scores with fair to excellent accuracy, which is further improved in some instances by minimal domain reconfigurations. The sole exception is SRS-24 self-image, which translates poorly. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Study Design: Case report. Objective: Two cases are presented in which the use of recombinant bone morphogenetic protein-2 (rh-BMP-2) in a posterior cervical decompression and instrumented arthrodesis may have contributed to seroma formation and cord compression. Summary Of Background Data: The use of rh-BMP-2 has been proven effective in promoting bone formation in anterior lumbar spine arthrodesis. Whether rh-BMP-2 is safe and/or effective in the cervical spine has not been determined. Adverse effects when it is used for anterior cervical fusion procedures have been reported but its role in posterior cervical decompression and instrumented fusions has yet to be determined. Methods: We report on two cases. The first is a 68-year-old man presenting with a substantial decline in his neurologic status approximately 2 weeks after surgery. The second is a 44-year-old man presenting with a substantial decline in his neurologic status approximately 5 days after surgery. Both complications occurred after a posterior cervical laminectomy and instrumented arthrodesis when rh-BMP-2 was used as a bone graft substitute. Results: Both patients were found to have a moderate-to-large seroma causing severe compression on the spinal cord and were urgently taken to an operating room for evacuation of the seromas. Both showed improvement of their neurologic status immediately after surgery. As rh-BMP-2 is known to occasionally cause seroma formation it is postulated that it may have been the cause of the seromas. Conclusion: Caution should be exercised with rh-BMP-2 use in posterior cervical applications when a laminectomy has been performed. The safe and effective dose and technique for application have yet to be determined. Seroma formation is possible, which can cause acute stenosis with cord compression and neurologic compromise. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

State and federal authorities in the USA have identified pharmacists as important in terrorism detection activities. However few pharmacists are trained for disaster response planning, or providing services at disaster sites. A distance training programme was created by the College of Pharmacy at the University of Kentucky, Chandler Medical Center (UKCMC) in collaboration with an academic Medical Center, urban and rural community pharmacists, experts in pharmacy and infectious disease, and two state pharmacy associations. There was a substantial improvement in bioterrorism training knowledge as judged by pre- and post-test results. During two years of training, a total of 142 licensed pharmacists received certification (approximately 4.7% of all those in Kentucky). In addition, a network of bioterrorism-trained pharmacists was created for the state. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Adult spinal deformity (ASD) patients with sagittal plane deformity (N) or structural lumbar/thoraco-lumbar (TL) curves can be treated with fusions stopping at the TL junction or extending to the upper thoracic (UT) spine. This study evaluates the impact on cost/cumulative quality-adjusted life year (QALY) in patients treated with TL vs UT fusion., Methods: ASD patients with > 4-level fusion and 2-year follow-up were included. Index and total episode-of-care costs were estimated using average itemized direct costs obtained from hospital records. Cumulative QALY gained were calculated from preoperative to 2-year postoperative change in Short Form Six-Dimension (SF-6D) scores. The TL and UT groups comprised patients with upper instrumented vertebrae (UIV) at T9-T12 and T2-T5, respectively., Results: Of 566 patients with type N or L curves, mean age was 63.2 ± 12.1 years, 72% were female and 93% Caucasians. Patients in the TL group had better sagittal vertical axis (7.3 ± 6.9 vs. 9.2 ± 8.1 cm, p = 0.01), lower surgical invasiveness (- 30; p < 0.001), and shorter OR time (- 35 min; p = 0.01). Index and total costs were 20% lower in the TL than in the UT group (p < 0.001). Cost/QALY was 65% lower (492,174.6 vs. 963,391.4), and 2-year QALY gain was 40% higher, in the TL than UT group (0.15 vs. 0.10; p = 0.02). Multivariate model showed TL fusions had lower total cost (p = 0.001) and higher QALY gain (p = 0.03) than UT fusions., Conclusion: In Schwab type N or L curves, TL fusions showed lower 2-year cost and improved QALY gain without increased reoperation rates or length of stay than UT fusions., Level of Evidence: III., (© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Scoliosis Research Society.)

Background: Research has focused on the increased correction from a three-column osteotomy (3CO) during adult spinal deformity (ASD) surgery. However, an in-depth analysis on the performance of a 3CO in a cohort of complex spinal deformity cases has not been described., Study Design/setting: This is a retrospective study on a prospectively enrolled, complex ASD database., Purpose: This study aimed to determine if three-column osteotomies demonstrate superior benefit in correction of complex sagittal deformity at the cost of increased perioperative complications., Methods: Surgical complex adult spinal deformity patients were included and grouped into thoracolumbar 3COs compared to those who did not have a 3CO (No 3CO) (remaining cohort). Rigid deformity was defined as ΔLL less than 33% from standing to supine. Severe deformity was defined as global (SVA > 70 mm) or C7-PL > 70 mm, or lumbopelvic (PI-LL > 30°). Means comparison tests assessed correction by 3CO grade/location. Multivariate analysis controlling for baseline deformity evaluated outcomes up to six weeks compared to No 3CO., Results: 648 patients were included (Mean age 61 ± 14.6 years, BMI 27.55 ± 5.8 kg/m 2 , levels fused: 12.6 ± 3.8). 126 underwent 3CO, a 20% higher usage than historical cohorts. 3COs were older, frail, and more likely to undergo revision (OR 5.2, 95% CI [2.6-10.6]; p < .001). 3COs were more likely to present with both severe global/lumbopelvic deformity (OR 4), 62.4% being rigid. 3COs had greater use of secondary rods (OR 4st) and incurred 4 times greater risk for: massive blood loss (> 3500 mL), longer LOS, SICU admission, perioperative wound and spine-related complications, and neurologic complications when performed below L3. 3COs had similar HRQL benefit, but higher perioperative opioid use. Mean segmental correction increased by grade (G3-21; G4-24; G5-27) and was 4 × greater than low-grade osteotomies, especially below L3 (OR 12). 3COs achieved 2 × greater spinopelvic correction. Higher grades properly distributed lordosis 50% of the time except L5. Pelvic compensation and non-response were relieved more often with increasing grade, with greater correction in all lower extremity parameters (p < .01). Due to the increased rate of complications, 3COs trended toward higher perioperative cost ($42,806 vs. $40,046, p = .086)., Conclusion: Three-column osteotomy usage in contemporary complex spinal deformities is generally limited to more disabled individuals undergoing the most severe sagittal and coronal realignment procedures. While there is an increased perioperative cost and prolongation of length of stay with usage, these techniques represent the most powerful realignment techniques available with a dramatic impact on normalization at operative levels and reciprocal changes., (© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Scoliosis Research Society.)

Purpose: Spine deformity surgery is a complex multi-step procedure that has a relatively high complication rate. The use of surgical safety checklists has been shown to reduce perioperative adverse events, but existing lists are varied and non-specific for spinal deformity surgery. Thus, the purpose of this study was to develop a comprehensive surgical checklist for complex spinal corrective surgery., Methods: An electronic survey consisting of 187 surgical checklist items that had been developed and used by a group of SRS members over a 5-year period was distributed to the Scoliosis Research Society Safety and Value Committee membership. The survey sections included: (1) pre-operative area, (2) initial operating room visit, (3) before turning, (4) positioning, (5) prepare and drape, (6) pre-incision timeout, (7) intraoperative, (8) finishing implant placement and confirming imaging, (9) final rods and locking, (10) prior to closure, (11) closure, (12) turn to supine, and (13) checkout/debriefing. Respondents graded each item on a five-point Likert scale based on their perceived importance and feasibility for inclusion in the checklist. Features graded as "moderately important" or "very important" to include by at least 70% of respondents were considered to meet the cutoff for inclusion-based standard Delphi practices. Study data were collated using REDCap., Results: A total of 25 surgeons completed the survey in its entirety. The overall checklist "package" was shortened to 9 individual checklist modules, with 2 to 16 items per checklist. In terms of individual checklist items, 40% of items (74 of 187) met the cutoff for inclusion; 17 of these items were graded as "very important," which included verifying the presence of implantable devices, reviewing the surgical plan and positioning with the surgical staff, securing the endotracheal tube, bite block confirmation, prone and lateral positioning, neuromonitoring baseline readings, double-checking that the implant screw caps were locked prior to closure, and confirming that the patient was moving bilateral lower extremities before leaving the operating room when possible., Conclusion: This study has led to the development of a specific spinal deformity surgical checklist of 74 (many specific to spine surgery) items that were considered important for inclusion; 17 were considered "very important"., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Purpose: Understanding the mechanism and extent of preoperative deformity in revision procedures may provide data to prevent future failures in lumbar spinal fusion patients., Methods: ASD patients without prior spine surgery (PRIMARY) and with prior short (SHORT) and long (LONG) fusions were included. SHORT patients were stratified into modes of failure: implant, junctional, malalignment, and neurologic. Baseline demographics, spinopelvic alignment, offset from alignment targets, and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) were compared across PRIMARY and SHORT cohorts. Segmental lordosis analyses, assessing under-, match, or over-correction to segmental and global lordosis targets, were performed by SRS-Schwab coronal curve type and construct length., Results: Among 785 patients, 430 (55%) were PRIMARY and 355 (45%) were revisions. Revision procedures included 181 (23%) LONG and 174 (22%) SHORT corrections. SHORT modes of failure included 27% implant, 40% junctional, 73% malalignment, and/or 28% neurologic. SHORT patients were older, frailer, and had worse baseline deformity (PT, PI-LL, SVA) and PROMs (NRS, ODI, VR-12, SRS-22) compared to primary patients (p < 0.001). Segmental lordosis analysis identified 93%, 88%, and 62% undercorrected patients at LL, L1-L4, and L4-S1, respectively. SHORT patients more often underwent 3-column osteotomies (30% vs. 12%, p < 0.001) and had higher ISSG Surgical Invasiveness Score (87.8 vs. 78.3, p = 0.006)., Conclusions: Nearly half of adult spinal deformity surgeries were revision fusions. Revision short fusions were associated with sagittal malalignment, often due to undercorrection of segmental lordosis goals, and frequently required more invasive procedures. Further initiatives to optimize alignment in lumbar fusions are needed to avoid costly and invasive deformity corrections., Level of Evidence: IV: Diagnostic: individual cross-sectional studies with consistently applied reference standard and blinding., (© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.)

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 five-year (5 yr) follow-up. Published methods were used to determine costs based on CMS.gov definitions and were based on the average DRG reimbursement rates. The 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 in 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 five years. The mean cost associated with surgery was $91,095±$47,003, with a utility gain of 0.091±0.086 at one years, QALY gained at 2 years of 0.171±0.183, and at five years of 0.42±0.43. The cost per QALY at two years was $414,885, which decreased to $142,058 at five years.With the threshold of $150,000 for CE, 19% met CE at two years and 56% at five years. 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 five years [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 two years, while comorbidity burden and medical complications were at five years., (Copyright © 2024 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Study Design: Multicentric retrospective study of prospectively collected data., Objective: Based on normative data from a cohort of asymptomatic volunteers, this study sought to determine the rate of abnormal values of proximal junctional angles (PJA) in adult spinal deformity (ASD) surgery patients, and compare it with PJK rate., Summary of Background Data: Proximal junctional kyphosis (PJK) definition does not take the vertebral level into account., Methods: This study included 721 healthy volunteers and 824 ASD surgery patients with 2-year postoperative follow-up. Normative values for each disc and vertebral body between T1 and T12 were analyzed, then normative values for PJA at each thoracic level were defined in the volunteer cohort as the mean±2 standard deviations. PJA abnormal values at the upper instrumented vertebra (UIV) were compared with Glattes' and Lovecchio's definitions for PJK in the ASD population at two years., Results: Mean age was 37.7±16.3 in the volunteer cohort, with 50.5% of females. Mean thoracic kyphosis (TK) was -50.9±10.8°. Corridors of normality included PJA greater than 20° between T3 and T12. Mean age was 60.5±14.0 years in the ASD cohort, with 77.2% of females. Mean baseline TK was -37.4±19.9°, with a significant increase after surgery (-15.6±15.3°, P<0.001). There was 46.2% of PJK according to Glattes' versus 8.7% according to Lovecchio's and 22.9% of kyphotic PJA compared to normative values (P<0.001)., Conclusion: This study provides normative values for segmental and regional alignment of thoracic spine, used to describe abnormal values of PJA for each level. Using level-adjusted PJA values allows a more precise assessment of abnormal proximal angles and question the definition for PJK., Level of Evidence: II., Competing Interests: Conflicts of interest: The authors have no conflict of interest to declare relatively to this study., (Copyright © 2024 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: Previous work comparing ASD to a normative population demonstrated that a large proportion of lumbar lordosis is lost proximally (L1-L4). The current study expands on these findings by collectively investigating regional angles and spinal contours., Methods: 119 asymptomatic volunteers with full-body free-standing radiographs were used to identify age-and-PI models of each Vertebra Pelvic Angle (VPA) from L5 to T10. These formulas were then applied to a cohort of primary surgical ASD patients without coronal malalignment. Loss of lumbar lordosis (LL) was defined as the offset between age-and-PI normative value and pre-operative alignment. Spine shapes defined by VPAs were compared and analyzed using paired t-tests., Results: 362 ASD patients were identified (age = 64.4 ± 13, 57.1% females). Compared to their age-and-PI normative values, patients demonstrated a significant loss in LL of 17 ± 19° in the following distribution: 14.1% had "No loss" (mean = 0.1 ± 2.3), 22.9% with 10°-loss (mean = 9.9 ± 2.9), 22.1% with 20°-loss (mean = 20.0 ± 2.8), and 29.3% with 30°-loss (mean = 33.8 ± 6.0). "No loss" patients' spine was slightly posterior to the normative shape from L4 to T10 (VPA difference of 2°), while superimposed on the normative one from S1 to L2 and became anterior at L1 in the "10°-loss" group. As LL loss increased, ASD and normative shapes offset extended caudally to L3 for the "20°-loss" group and L4 for the "30°-loss" group., Conclusion: As LL loss increases, the difference between ASD and normative shapes first occurs proximally and then progresses incrementally caudally. Understanding spinal contour and LL loss location may be key to achieving sustainable correction by identifying optimal and personalized postoperative shapes., (© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.)

Background: Our understanding of the relationship between sagittal alignment and mechanical complications is evolving. In normal spines, the L1-pelvic angle (L1PA) accounts for the magnitude and distribution of lordosis and is strongly associated with pelvic incidence (PI), and the T4-pelvic angle (T4PA) is within 4° of the L1PA. We aimed to examine the clinical implications of realignment to a normal L1PA and T4-L1PA mismatch., Methods: A prospective multicenter adult spinal deformity registry was queried for patients who underwent fixation from the T1-T5 region to the sacrum and had 2-year radiographic follow-up. Normal sagittal alignment was defined as previously described for normal spines: L1PA = PI × 0.5 - 21°, and T4-L1PA mismatch = 0°. Mechanical failure was defined as severe proximal junctional kyphosis (PJK), displaced rod fracture, or reoperation for junctional failure, pseudarthrosis, or rod fracture within 2 years. Multivariable nonlinear logistic regression was used to define target ranges for L1PA and T4-L1PA mismatch that minimized the risk of mechanical failure. The relationship between changes in T4PA and changes in global sagittal alignment according to the C2-pelvic angle (C2PA) was determined using linear regression. Lastly, multivariable regression was used to assess associations between initial postoperative C2PA and patient-reported outcomes at 1 year, adjusting for preoperative scores and age., Results: The median age of the 247 included patients was 64 years (interquartile range, 57 to 69 years), and 202 (82%) were female. Deviation from a normal L1PA or T4-L1PA mismatch in either direction was associated with a significantly higher risk of mechanical failure, independent of age. Risk was minimized with an L1PA of PI × 0.5 - (19° ± 2°) and T4-L1PA mismatch between -3° and +1°. Changes in T4PA and in C2PA at the time of final follow-up were strongly associated (r2 = 0.96). Higher postoperative C2PA was independently associated with more disability, more pain, and worse self-image at 1 year., Conclusions: We defined sagittal alignment targets using L1PA (relative to PI) and the T4-L1PA mismatch, which are both directly modifiable during surgery. In patients undergoing long fusion to the sacrum, realignment based on these targets may lead to fewer mechanical failures., Level of Evidence: Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence., Competing Interests: Disclosure: The International Spine Study Group (ISSG) is funded through research grants from NuVasive, SI-Bone, DePuy Synthes Spine, K2M, Stryker, Biomet, AlloSource, and Orthofix, and individual donations. The Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest forms are provided with the online version of the article (http://links.lww.com/JBJS/I191)., (Copyright © 2024 by The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, Incorporated.)

Purpose: To evaluate the variability in intraoperative fluid management during adult spinal deformity (ASD) surgery, and analyze the association with complications, intensive care unit (ICU) requirement, and length of hospital stay (LOS)., Methods: Multicenter comparative cohort study. Patients ≥ 18 years old and with ASD were included. Intraoperative intravenous (IV) fluid data were collected including: crystalloids, colloids, crystalloid/colloid ratio (C/C), total IV fluid (tIVF, ml), normalized total IV fluid (nIVF, ml/kg/h), input/output ratio (IOR), input-output difference (IOD), and normalized input-output difference (nIOD, ml/kg/h). Data from different centers were compared for variability analysis, and fluid parameters were analyzed for possible associations with the outcomes., Results: Seven hundred ninety-eight patients with a median age of 65.2 were included. Among different surgical centers, tIVF, nIVF, and C/C showed significant variation (p < 0.001 for each) with differences of 4.8-fold, 3.7-fold, and 4.9-fold, respectively. Two hundred ninety-two (36.6%) patients experienced at least one in-hospital complication, and ninety-two (11.5%) were IV fluid related. Univariate analysis showed significant relations for: LOS and tIVF (ρ = 0.221, p < 0.001), IOD (ρ = 0.115, p = 0.001) and IOR (ρ = -0.138, p < 0.001); IV fluid-related complications and tIVF (p = 0.049); ICU stay and tIVF, nIVF, IOD and nIOD (p < 0.001 each); extended ICU stay and tIVF (p < 0.001), nIVF (p = 0.010) and IOD (p < 0.001). Multivariate analysis controlling for confounders showed significant relations for: LOS and tIVF (p < 0.001) and nIVF (p = 0.003); ICU stay and IOR (p = 0.002), extended ICU stay and tIVF (p = 0.004)., Conclusion: Significant variability and lack of standardization in intraoperative IV fluid management exists between different surgical centers. Excessive fluid administration was found to be correlated with negative outcomes., Level of Evidence: III., (© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Scoliosis Research Society.)

Background: Severe sagittal plane deformity with loss of L4-S1 lordosis is disabling and can be improved through various surgical techniques. However, data are limited on the differing ability of anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF), pedicle subtraction osteotomy (PSO), and transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) to achieve alignment goals in severely malaligned patients., Methods: Severe adult spinal deformity patients with preoperative PI-LL >20°, L4-S1 lordosis <30°, and full body radiographs and PROMs at baseline and 6-week postoperative visit were included. Patients were grouped into ALIF (1-2 level ALIF at L4-S1), PSO (L4/L5 PSO), and TLIF (1-2 level TLIF at L4-S1). Comparative analyses were performed on demographics, radiographic spinopelvic parameters, complications, and PROMs., Results: Among the 96 included patients, 40 underwent ALIF, 27 underwent PSO, and 29 underwent TLIF. At baseline, cohorts had comparable age, sex, race, Edmonton frailty scores, and radiographic spinopelvic parameters (P > 0.05). However, PSO was performed more often in revision cases (P < 0.001). Following surgery, L4-S1 lordosis correction (P = 0.001) was comparable among ALIF and PSO patients and caudal lordotic apex migration (P = 0.044) was highest among ALIF patients. PSO patients had higher intraoperative estimated blood loss (P < 0.001) and motor deficits (P = 0.049), and in-hospital ICU admission (P = 0.022) and blood products given (P = 0.004), but were otherwise comparable in terms of length of stay, blood transfusion given, and postoperative admission to rehab. Likewise, 90-day postoperative complication profiles and 6-week PROMs were comparable as well., Conclusions: ALIF can restore L4-S1 sagittal alignment as powerfully as PSO, with fewer intraoperative and in-hospital complications. When feasible, ALIF is a suitable alternative to PSO and likely superior to TLIF for correcting L4-S1 lordosis among patients with severe sagittal malalignment., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Study Design: Retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data., Objective: Evaluate the impact of correcting normative segmental lordosis values on postoperative outcomes., Background: Restoring lumbar lordosis magnitude is crucial in adult spinal deformity surgery, but the optimal location and segmental distribution remain unclear., Patients and Methods: Patients were grouped based on offset to normative segmental lordosis values, extracted from recent publications. Matched patients were within 10% of the cohort's mean offset, less than or over 10% were undercorrected and overcorrected. Surgical technique, patient-reported outcome measures, and surgical complications were compared across groups at baseline and two years., Results: In total, 510 patients with a mean age of 64.6, a mean Charlson comorbidity index 2.08, and a mean follow-up of 25 months. L4-5 was least likely to be matched (19.1%), while L4-S1 was the most likely (24.3%). More patients were overcorrected at proximal levels (T10-L2; undercorrected, U: 32.2% vs. matched, M: 21.7% vs. overcorrected, O: 46.1%) and undercorrected at distal levels (L4-S1: U: 39.0% vs. M: 24.3% vs. O: 36.8%). Postoperative Oswestry disability index was comparable across correction groups at all spinal levels except at L4-S1 and T10-L2/L4-S1, where overcorrected patients and matched were better than undercorrected (U: 32.1 vs. M: 25.4 vs. O: 26.5, P =0.005; U: 36.2 vs. M: 24.2 vs. O: 26.8, P =0.001; respectively). Patients overcorrected at T10-L2 experienced higher rates of proximal junctional failure (U: 16.0% vs. M: 15.6% vs. O: 32.8%, P <0.001) and had greater posterior inclination of the upper instrumented vertebrae (U: -9.2±9.4° vs. M: -9.6±9.1° vs. O: -12.2±10.0°, P <0.001), whereas undercorrection at these levels led to higher rates of revision for implant failure (U: 14.2% vs. M: 7.3% vs. O: 6.4%, P =0.025)., Conclusions: Patients undergoing fusion for adult spinal deformity suffer higher rates of proximal junctional failure with overcorrection and increased rates of implant failure with undercorrection based on normative segmental lordosis., Level of Evidence: Level IV., Competing Interests: The authors report no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2024 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: To assess impact of baseline disability on HRQL outcomes., Methods: CD patients with baseline (BL) and 2 year (2Y) data included, and ranked into quartiles by baseline NDI, from lowest/best score (Q1) to highest/worst score (Q4). Means comparison tests analyzed differences between quartiles. ANCOVA and logistic regressions assessed differences in outcomes while accounting for covariates (BL deformity, comorbidities, HRQLs, surgical details and complications)., Results: One hundred and sixteen patients met inclusion (Age:60.97 ± 10.45 years, BMI: 28.73 ± 7.59 kg/m 2 , CCI: 0.94 ± 1.31). The cohort mean cSVA was 38.54 ± 19.43 mm and TS-CL: 37.34 ± 19.73. Mean BL NDI by quartile was: Q1: 25.04 ± 8.19, Q2: 41.61 ± 2.77, Q3: 53.31 ± 4.32, and Q4: 69.52 ± 8.35. Q2 demonstrated greatest improvement in NRS Neck at 2Y (-3.93), compared to Q3 (-1.61, p = .032) and Q4 (-1.41, p = .015). Q2 demonstrated greater improvement in NRS Back (-1.71), compared to Q4 (+ 0.84, p = .010). Q2 met MCID in NRS Neck at the highest rates (69.9%), especially compared to Q4 (30.3%), p = .039. Q2 had the greatest improvement in EQ-5D (+ 0.082), compared to Q1 (+ 0.073), Q3 (+ 0.022), and Q4 (+ 0.014), p = .034. Q2 also had the greatest mJOA improvement (+ 1.517), p = .042., Conclusions: Patients in Q2, with mean BL NDI of 42, consistently demonstrated the greatest improvement in HRQLs whereas those in Q4, (NDI 70), saw the least. BL NDI between 39 and 44 may represent a disability "Sweet Spot," within which operative intervention maximizes patient-reported outcomes. Furthermore, delaying intervention until patients are severely disabled, beyond an NDI of 61, may limit the benefits of surgery., (© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Scoliosis Research Society.)

Study Design: Retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data., Objective: Evaluate the impact of prior cervical constructs on upper instrumented vertebrae (UIV) selection and postoperative outcomes among patients undergoing thoracolumbar deformity correction., Background: Surgical planning for adult spinal deformity (ASD) patients involves consideration of spinal alignment and existing fusion constructs., Methods: ASD patients with (ANTERIOR or POSTERIOR) and without (NONE) prior cervical fusion who underwent thoracolumbar fusion were included. Demographics, radiographic alignment, patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), and complications were compared. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed on POSTERIOR patients to identify parameters predictive of UIV choice and to evaluate postoperative outcomes impacted by UIV selection., Results: Among 542 patients, with 446 NONE, 72 ANTERIOR, and 24 POSTERIOR patients, mean age was 64.4 years and 432 (80%) were female. Cervical fusion patients had worse preoperative cervical and lumbosacral deformity, and PROMs (P<0.05). In the POSTERIOR cohort, preoperative LIV was frequently below the cervicothoracic junction (54%) and uncommonly (13%) connected to the thoracolumbar UIV. Multivariate analyses revealed that higher preoperative cervical SVA (coeff=-0.22, 95%CI=-0.43--0.01, P=0.038) and C2SPi (coeff=-0.72, 95%CI=-1.36--0.07, P=0.031), and lower preoperative thoracic kyphosis (coeff=0.14, 95%CI=0.01-0.28, P=0.040) and thoracolumbar lordosis (coeff=0.22, 95%CI=0.10-0.33, P=0.001) were predictive of cranial UIV. Two-year postoperatively, cervical patients continued to have worse cervical deformity and PROMs (P<0.05) but had comparable postoperative complications. Choice of thoracolumbar UIV below or above T6, as well as the number of unfused levels between constructs, did not affect patient outcomes., Conclusions: Among patients who underwent thoracolumbar deformity correction, prior cervical fusion was associated with more severe spinopelvic deformity and PROMs preoperatively. The choice of thoracolumbar UIV was strongly predicted by their baseline cervical and thoracolumbar alignment. Despite their poor preoperative condition, these patients still experienced significant improvements in their thoracolumbar alignment and PROMs after surgery, irrespective of UIV selection., Level of Evidence: IV., Competing Interests: The authors report no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2024 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Severe pain, anxiety, and high opioid use are common following lumbar spine surgery (LSS). Yoga helps to reduce pain and anxiety, but it has not been considered for postsurgical care. The authors developed and tested the feasibility of a tailored yoga program designed for individuals undergoing LSS and explored clinical feasibility of yoga intervention on measures of pain, function, psychological status, and opioid use. Methods: Individuals scheduled for LSS were randomized into yoga versus control groups presurgery. Participants in the yoga group received tailored yoga sessions plus usual care, whereas participants in the control group received usual care only during the hospital stay post-LSS. In-person daily yoga sessions were individually presented and performed in the participant's hospital room. Feasibility was assessed by recruitment and retention rates, rate of yoga session completion, tolerance to yoga intervention, and ability to carry out planned assessment. Exploratory clinical outcomes included pain, psychological measures, Timed-Up-and-Go test, gait distance, and opioid use, during the hospital stay post-LSS. Results: Forty-one participants were enrolled, of which 30 completed. There were no dropouts. Planned assessments were completed within 45 min, suggesting no excessive burden on participants. Baseline variables were similar across both groups. The majority of participants participated in yoga intervention on the day of surgery or one day after surgery with acceptance rate of 100%. Participants showed good tolerance to yoga intervention on 0-4 tolerance scale and by their reports of exploratory clinical outcomes. Conclusion: This study indicates feasibility for a modified yoga program for postoperative care following LSS due to participant tolerance and retention. The results provide preliminary framework for future confirmatory studies that can assess the potential benefits of yoga in reducing pain, catastrophizing behavior, and opioid use and improving function. A modified yoga program focusing on diaphragmatic breathing, relaxation, and core isometric contraction exercises can be an important adjunct intervention for patients undergoing LSS. CTR Number: This trial was registered in UMIN CTR (https://rctportal.niph.go.jp/en/) with registration number: UMIN000032595.

Background: Hip osteoarthritis (OA) is common in patients with adult spinal deformity (ASD). Limited data exist on the prevalence of hip OA in patients with ASD, or on its impact on baseline and postoperative alignment and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). Therefore, this paper will assess the prevalence and impact of hip OA on alignment and PROMs., Methods: Patients with ASD who underwent L1-pelvis or longer fusions were included. Two independent reviewers graded hip OA with the Kellgren-Lawrence (KL) classification and stratified it by severity into non-severe (KL grade 1 or 2) and severe (KL grade 3 or 4). Radiographic parameters and PROMs were compared among 3 patient groups: Hip-Spine (hip KL grade 3 or 4 bilaterally), Unilateral (UL)-Hip (hip KL grade 3 or 4 unilaterally), or Spine (hip KL grade 1 or 2 bilaterally)., Results: Of 520 patients with ASD who met inclusion criteria for an OA prevalence analysis, 34% (177 of 520) had severe bilateral hip OA and unilateral or bilateral hip arthroplasty had been performed in 8.7% (45 of 520). A subset of 165 patients had all data components and were examined: 68 Hip-Spine, 32 UL-Hip, and 65 Spine. Hip-Spine patients were older (67.9 ± 9.5 years, versus 59.6 ± 10.1 years for Spine and 65.8 ± 7.5 years for UL-Hip; p < 0.001) and had a higher frailty index (4.3 ± 2.6, versus 2.7 ± 2.0 for UL-Hip and 2.9 ± 2.0 for Spine; p < 0.001). At 1 year, the groups had similar lumbar lordosis, yet the Hip-Spine patients had a worse sagittal vertebral axis (SVA) measurement (45.9 ± 45.5 mm, versus 25.1 ± 37.1 mm for UL-Hip and 19.0 ± 39.3 mm for Spine; p = 0.001). Hip-Spine patients also had worse Veterans RAND-12 Physical Component Summary scores at baseline (25.7 ± 9.3, versus 28.7 ± 9.8 for UL-Hip and 31.3 ± 10.5 for Spine; p = 0.005) and 1 year postoperatively (34.5 ± 11.4, versus 40.3 ± 10.4 for UL-Hip and 40.1 ± 10.9 for Spine; p = 0.006)., Conclusions: This study of operatively treated ASD revealed that 1 in 3 patients had severe hip OA bilaterally. Such patients with severe bilateral hip OA had worse baseline SVA and PROMs that persisted 1 year following ASD surgery, despite correction of lordosis., Level of Evidence: Prognostic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence., Competing Interests: Disclosure: Funding for this study was received from DePuy Synthes Spine, NuVasive, and K2/Stryker. In addition, the International Spine Study Group reports grants to the foundation from Medtronic, Globus, Stryker, SI Bone, and Carlsmed. The Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest forms are provided with the online version of the article (http://links.lww.com/JBJS/H962)., (Copyright © 2024 by The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, Incorporated.)

Study Design: This study was a retrospective multi-center comparative cohort study., Materials and Methods: A retrospective institutional database of operative adult spinal deformity patients was utilized. All fusions > 5 vertebral levels and including the sacrum/pelvis were eligible for inclusion. Revisions, 3 column osteotomies, and patients with < 2-year clinical follow-up were excluded. Patients were separated into 3 groups based on surgical approach: 1) posterior spinal fusion without interbody (PSF), 2) PSF with interbody (PSF-IB), and 3) anteroposterior (AP) fusion (anterior lumbar interbody fusion or lateral lumbar interbody fusion with posterior screw fixation). Intraoperative, radiographic, and clinical outcomes, as well as complications, were compared between groups with ANOVA and χ 2 tests., Results: One-hundred and thirty-eight patients were included for study (PSF, n = 37; PSF-IB, n = 44; AP, n = 57). Intraoperatively, estimated blood loss was similar between groups (p = 0.171). However, the AP group had longer operative times (547.5 min) compared to PSF (385.1) and PSF-IB (370.7) (p < 0.001). Additionally, fusion length was shorter in PSF-IB (11.4) compared to AP (13.6) and PSF (12.9) (p = 0.004). There were no differences between the groups in terms of change in alignment from preoperative to 2 years postoperative. There were no differences in clinical outcomes. While postoperative complications were largely similar between groups, operative complications were higher in the AP group (31.6%) compared to the PSF (5.4%) and PSF-IB (9.1) groups (p < 0.001)., Conclusion: While there were differences in intraoperative outcomes (operative time and fusion length), there were no differences in postoperative clinical or radiographic outcomes. AP fusion was associated with a higher rate of operative complications., (© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.)

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 SRS-Activity, 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., Competing Interests: The authors report no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2023 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: Provide benchmarks for the rates of complications by type and timing., Study Design: Prospective multicenter database., Background: Complication rates following adult spinal deformity (ASD) surgery have been previously reported. However, the interplay between timing and complication type warrants further analysis., Methods: The data for this study were sourced from a prospective, multicenter ASD database. The date and type of complication were collected and classified into three severity groups (minor, major, and major leading to reoperation). Only complications occurring before the two-year visit were retained for analysis., Results: Of the 1260 patients eligible for two-year follow-up, 997 (79.1%) achieved two-year follow-up. The overall complication rate was 67.4% (N=672). 247 patients (24.8%) experienced at least one complication on the day of surgery (including intraoperatively), 359 (36.0%) between postoperative day 1 and six weeks postoperatively, 271 (27.2%) between six weeks and one-year postoperatively, and finally 162 (16.3%) between one year and two years postoperatively. Using Kaplan-Meier survival analysis, the rate of remaining complication-free was estimated at different time points for different severities and types of complications. Stratification by type of complication demonstrated that most of the medical complications occurred within the first 60 days. Surgical complications presented over two distinct timeframes. Operative complications, incision-related complications, and infections occurred early (within 60 d), while implant-related and radiographic complications occurred at a constant rate over the two-year follow-up period. Neurological complications had the highest occurrence within the first 60 days but continued to increase up to the two-year visit., Conclusion: Only one-third of ASD patients remained complication-free by two years, and 2 of 10 patients had a complication requiring a reoperation or revision. An estimation of the timing and type of complications associated with surgical treatment may prove useful for more meaningful patient counseling and aid in assessing the cost-effectiveness of treatment., Level of Evidence: 3., Competing Interests: The authors report no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2024 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Study Design: Retrospective review of prospectively collected data., Objective: To investigate the effect of lower extremity osteoarthritis on sagittal alignment and compensatory mechanisms in adult spinal deformity (ASD)., Background: Spine, hip, and knee pathologies often overlap in ASD patients. Limited data exists on how lower extremity osteoarthritis impacts sagittal alignment and compensatory mechanisms in ASD., Patients and Methods: In total, 527 preoperative ASD patients with full body radiographs were included. Patients were grouped by Kellgren-Lawrence grade of bilateral hips and knees and stratified by quartile of T1-Pelvic Angle (T1PA) severity into low-, mid-, high-, and severe-T1PA. Full-body alignment and compensation were compared across quartiles. Regression analysis examined the incremental impact of hip and knee osteoarthritis severity on compensation., Results: The mean T1PA for low-, mid-, high-, and severe-T1PA groups was 7.3°, 19.5°, 27.8°, and 41.6°, respectively. Mid-T1PA patients with severe hip osteoarthritis had an increased sagittal vertical axis and global sagittal alignment ( P <0.001). Increasing hip osteoarthritis severity resulted in decreased pelvic tilt ( P =0.001) and sacrofemoral angle ( P <0.001), but increased knee flexion ( P =0.012). Regression analysis revealed that with increasing T1PA, pelvic tilt correlated inversely with hip osteoarthritis and positively with knee osteoarthritis ( r2 =0.812). Hip osteoarthritis decreased compensation through sacrofemoral angle (β-coefficient=-0.206). Knee and hip osteoarthritis contributed to greater knee flexion (β-coefficients=0.215, 0.101; respectively). For pelvic shift, only hip osteoarthritis significantly contributed to the model (β-coefficient=0.100)., Conclusions: For the same magnitude of spinal deformity, increased hip osteoarthritis severity was associated with worse truncal and full body alignment with posterior translation of the pelvis. Patients with severe hip and knee osteoarthritis exhibited decreased hip extension and pelvic tilt but increased knee flexion. This examines sagittal alignment and compensation in ASD patients with hip and knee arthritis and may help delineate whether hip and knee flexion is due to spinal deformity compensation or lower extremity osteoarthritis., Competing Interests: The International Spine Study Group reports the following: grants to the foundation from Medtronic, Globus, Stryker, SI Bone, Carlsmed. The remaining authors report no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2024 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Study Design: Retrospective review of a prospectively-collected multicenter database., Objectives: The objective of this study was to determine optimal strategies in terms of focal angular correction and length of proximal extension during revision for PJF., Methods: 134 patients requiring proximal extension for PJF were analyzed in this study. The correlation between amount of proximal junctional angle (PJA) reduction and recurrence of proximal junctional kyphosis (PJK) and/or PJF was investigated. Following stratification by the degree of PJK correction and the numbers of levels extended proximally, rates of radiographic PJK (PJA >28° & ΔPJA >22°), and recurrent surgery for PJF were reported., Results: Before revision, mean PJA was 27.6° ± 14.6°. Mean number of levels extended was 6.0 ± 3.3. Average PJA reduction was 18.8° ± 18.9°. A correlation between the degree of PJA reduction and rate of recurrent PJK was observed (r = -.222). Recurrent radiographic PJK (0%) and clinical PJF (4.5%) were rare in patients undergoing extension ≥8 levels, regardless of angular correction. Patients with small reductions (<5°) and small extensions (<4 levels) experienced moderate rates of recurrent PJK (19.1%) and PJF (9.5%). Patients with large reductions (>30°) and extensions <8 levels had the highest rate of recurrent PJK (31.8%) and PJF (16.0%)., Conclusion: While the degree of focal PJK correction must be determined by the treating surgeon based upon clinical goals, recurrent PJK may be minimized by limiting reduction to <30°. If larger PJA correction is required, more extensive proximal fusion constructs may mitigate recurrent PJK/PJF rates., Competing Interests: Declaration of Conflicting InterestsThe author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Competing Interests: Declaration of Conflicting InterestsThe authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Background: The objective of this study was to evaluate if imbalance influences complication rates, radiological outcomes, and patient-reported outcomes (PROMs) following adult spinal deformity (ASD) surgery. Methods: ASD patients with baseline and 2-year radiographic and PROMs were included. Patients were grouped according to whether they answered yes or no to a recent history of pre-operative loss of balance. The groups were propensity-matched by age, pelvic incidence-lumbar lordosis (PI-LL), and surgical invasiveness score. Results: In total, 212 patients were examined (106 in each group). Patients with gait imbalance had worse baseline PROM measures, including Oswestry disability index (45.2 vs. 36.6), SF-36 mental component score (44 vs. 51.8), and SF-36 physical component score ( p < 0.001 for all). After 2 years, patients with gait imbalance had less pelvic tilt correction (-1.2 vs. -3.6°, p = 0.039) for a comparable PI-LL correction (-11.9 vs. -15.1°, p = 0.144). Gait imbalance patients had higher rates of radiographic proximal junctional kyphosis (PJK) (26.4% vs. 14.2%) and implant-related complications (47.2% vs. 34.0%). After controlling for age, baseline sagittal parameters, PI-LL correction, and comorbidities, patients with imbalance had 2.2-times-increased odds of PJK after 2 years. Conclusions: Patients with a self-reported loss of balance/unsteady gait have significantly worse PROMs and higher risk of PJK.

Study Design: Retrospective review of prospectively collected data., Objective: To analyze the impact of operative room (OR) time in adult spinal deformity (ASD) surgery on patient outcomes., Background: It is currently unknown if OR time in ASD patients matched for deformity severity and surgical invasiveness is associated with patient outcomes., Materials and Methods: ASD patients with baseline and two-year postoperative radiographic and patient-reported outcome measures (PROM) data, undergoing a posterior-only approach for long fusion (>L1-Ilium) were included. Patients were grouped into short OR time (<40th percentile: <359 min) and long OR time (>60th percentile: >421 min). Groups were matched by age, baseline deformity severity, and surgical invasiveness. Demographics, radiographic, PROM data, fusion rate, and complications were compared between groups at baseline and two years follow-up., Results: In total, 270 patients were included for analysis: the mean OR time was 286 minutes in the short OR group versus 510 minutes in the long OR group ( P <0.001). Age, gender, percent of revision cases, surgical invasiveness, pelvic incidence minus lumbar lordosis, sagittal vertical axis, and pelvic tilt were comparable between groups ( P >0.05). Short OR had a slightly lower body mass index than the short OR group ( P <0.001) and decompression was more prevalent in the long OR time ( P =0.042). Patients in the long group had greater hospital length of stay ( P =0.02); blood loss ( P <0.001); proportion requiring intensive care unit ( P =0.003); higher minor complication rate ( P =0.001); with no significant differences for major complications or revision procedures ( P >0.5). Both groups had comparable radiographic fusion rates ( P =0.152) and achieved improvement in sagittal alignment measures, Oswestry disability index, and Short Form-36 ( P <0.001)., Conclusion: Shorter OR time for ASD correction is associated with a lower minor complication rate, a lower estimated blood loss, fewer intensive care unit admissions, and a shorter hospital length of stay without sacrificing alignment correction or PROMs. Maximizing operative efficiency by minimizing OR time in ASD surgery has the potential to benefit patients, surgeons, and hospital systems., Competing Interests: The authors report no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2023 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

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., (Copyright © Congress of Neurological Surgeons 2023. All rights reserved.)

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., Competing Interests: P.G.P.: Allosource: Other financial or material support; Cervical Scoliosis Research Society: Research support; Globus Medical: Paid presenter or speaker; Medtronic: Paid consultant; Royal Biologics: Paid consultant; Spine: Editorial or governing board; SpineWave: Paid consultant; Terumo: Paid consultant; Zimmer: Paid presenter or speaker. V.L.: DePuy, A Johnson & Johnson Company: Paid presenter or speaker; European Spine Journal : Editorial or governing board; Globus Medical: Paid consultant; International Spine Study Group: Board or committee member; Nuvasive: IP royalties; Scoliosis Research Society: Board or committee member; The Permanente Medical Group: Paid presenter or speaker. R.F.: Nemaris: Stock or stock options. H.J.K.: AAOS: Board or committee member; Alphatec Spine: Paid consultant; AO SPINE: Board or committee member; Cervical Spine Research Society: Board or committee member; HSS Journal , Asian Spine Journal : Editorial or governing board; ISSGF: Research support; K2M: IP royalties; Scoliosis Research Society: Board or committee member; Zimmer: IP royalties. A.H.D.: EOS: Paid consultant; Medicrea: Paid consultant; Medtronic Sofamor Danek: Paid consultant; Novabone: Paid consultant; Orthofix Inc.: Paid consultant; Research support; Southern Spine: IP royalties; Spineart: IP royalties; Paid consultant; Springer: Publishing royalties, financial or material support; Stryker: Paid consultant. J.L.G.: Acuity: IP royalties; Paid consultant; Alan L. & Jacqueline B. Stuart Spine Research: Research support; Cerapedics: Research support; Cingulate Therapeutics: Stock or stock Options; DePuy, A Johnson & Johnson Company: Paid presenter or speaker; Global Spine Journal —Reviewer: Editorial or governing board; Intellirod Spine Inc.: Research support; K2M /Stryker: Board or committee member; MAZOR Surgical Technologies: Paid consultant; Medtronic: Board or committee member; Paid consultant; Research support; Norton Healthcare: Research support; Nuvasive: IP royalties; Paid consultant; Pfizer: Research support; Scoliosis Research Society: Research support; Spine Deformity —Reviewer: Editorial or governing board; Stryker: Paid consultant; Paid presenter or speaker; Texas Scottish Rite Hospital: Research support; The Spine Journal —Reviewer: Editorial or governing board. T.S.P.: Altus: IP royalties; Globus Medical: Paid consultant; Medicrea: Paid consultant; Medtronic: Paid consultant; Nuvasive: Paid consultant; Spine Align: Stock or stock Options; Stryker: Paid consultant; Torus Medical: Stock or stock Options. G.M.M.: Carlsmed: Paid consultant; ISSGF: Research support; K2M: IP royalties; Nuvasive: IP royalties; Paid consultant; Research support; Scoliosis Research Society: Board or committee member; SeaSpine: Paid consultant; Stryker: Paid consultant; Viseon: Paid consultant. R.K.E.: Aesculap/B.Braun: Paid consultant; Alphatec Spine: Stock or stock Options; Baxter: Paid consultant; Biedermann-Motech: Paid consultant; Carevature: Paid consultant; Stock or stock Options; Globus Medical: IP royalties; Invuity: Stock or stock Options; Medtronic: Paid consultant; Nocimed: Stock or stock Options; Nuvasive: IP royalties; Paid consultant; Research support; Stock or stock Options; Radius: Paid presenter or speaker; San Diego Spine Foundation: Board or committee member; Scoliosis Research Society: Board or committee member; Seaspine: IP royalties; Paid consultant; Stock or stock Options; SI Bone: IP royalties; Paid consultant; Society of Lateral Access Surgery: Board or committee member; Spine Innovations: Stock or stock Options; Stryker: Paid consultant. K.H.: European Spine Journal : Editorial or governing board; Nuvasive: Research support. E.O.K.: AO Spine: Paid presenter or speaker; Research support; DePuy, A Johnson & Johnson Company: Paid consultant; Medicrea: Paid consultant; Medtronic: Paid consultant; Stryker: Paid consultant. B.G.L.: ISSGF: Paid consultant. R.A.H.: American Orthopaedic Association: Board or committee member; Cervical Spine Research Society: Board or committee member; DePuy, A Johnson & Johnson Company: IP royalties; Paid consultant; Paid presenter or speaker; Globus Medical: IP royalties; Paid consultant; Paid presenter or speaker; International Spine Study Group: Board or committee member; ISSLS Textbook of the Lumbar Spine: Editorial or governing board; Medtronic: Paid consultant; Paid presenter or speaker; North American Spine Society: Board or committee member; Orthofix Inc.: Paid consultant; Paid presenter or speaker; Scoliosis Research Society: Board or committee member; SeaSpine: IP royalties; Spine Connect: Stock or stock Options; Western Ortho Assn: Board or committee member. D.C.B.: Bioventus: Research support; DePuy, A Johnson & Johnson Company: IP royalties; Paid consultant; Research support; Pfizer: Research support; Progenerative Medical: Stock or stock Options; Scoliosis Research Society: Board or committee member; Spine Deformity : Editorial or governing board. P.V.M.: AANS/CNS Spine Section and Scoliosis Research Society: Board or committee member; American Association of Neurological Surgeons: Board or committee member; Cervical Spine Research Society: Board or committee member; Congress of Neurological Surgeons: Board or committee member; DePuy, A Johnson & Johnson Company: IP royalties; Paid consultant; Global Spine Journal : Editorial or governing board; Globus Medical: Paid consultant; International Spine Study Group: Research support; Neurosurgery: Editorial or governing board; NREF: Research support; Spinal Deformity: Editorial or governing board; Spinicity/ISD: Stock or stock Options; Springer: Publishing royalties, financial or material support; Stryker: Paid consultant; Taylor and Francis: Publishing royalties, financial or material support; Thieme: Publishing royalties, financial or material support; World Neurosurgery: Editorial or governing board. P.P.: AANS Spine Section: Board or committee member; Cerapedics: Research support; DePuy, A Johnson & Johnson Company: Research support; Globus Medical: IP royalties; Paid consultant; ISSG: Research support; Journal of Neurosurgery Spine : Editorial or governing board; Neurosurgery: Editorial or governing board; North American Spine Society: Board or committee member; Nuvasive: Paid consultant; Operative Neurosurgery: Editorial or governing board; Scoliosis Research Society: Board or committee member; SI-Bone: Research support. F.J.S.: DePuy, A Johnson & Johnson Company: Research support; Globus Medical: Paid consultant; Paid presenter or speaker; K2M: IP royalties; Paid consultant; Paid presenter or speaker; Medicrea: Paid consultant; Medtronic: Paid consultant; Medtronic Sofamor Danek: IP royalties; Paid presenter or speaker; Nuvasive: Research support; Scoliosis Research Society: Board or committee member; Spine Deformity : Editorial or governing board; Stryker: Research support; VP of International Spine Society Group (ISSG): Board or committee member; Zimmer: IP royalties; Paid consultant; Paid presenter or speaker. D.C.: Globus Medical: IP royalties; Paid consultant. C.I.S.: AANS: Board or committee member; Cervical Spine Research Society: Board or committee member; DePuy, A Johnson & Johnson Company: Paid presenter or speaker; Research support; Globus Medical: Research support; Medtronic: Other financial or material support; Paid consultant; Medtronic Sofamor Danek: IP royalties; Paid presenter or speaker; Research support; Neurosurgery RRC: Board or committee member; Nuvasive: IP royalties; Paid consultant; Paid presenter or speaker; Research support; Stock or stock Options; Proprio: Paid consultant; Scoliosis Research Society: Board or committee member; SI Bone: IP royalties; Spinal Deformity: Editorial or governing board; Spine: Editorial or governing board. R.S.B.: allosource: Paid consultant; Research support; Biomet: Research support; DePuy, A Johnson & Johnson Company: Paid consultant; Research support; EOS: Research support; Globus Medical: Research support; k2 medical: IP royalties; Paid consultant; Paid presenter or speaker; Research support; Medtronic Sofamor Danek: Research support; North American Spine Society: Board or committee member; Nuvasive: IP royalties; Research support; Orthofix Inc.: Research support; Scoliosis Research Society: Board or committee member; Stryker: IP royalties; Paid presenter or speaker. C.P.A.: Biomet Spine: IP royalties; DePuy, A Johnson & Johnson Company: IP royalties; Paid consultant; Research support; Global Spine Analytics—Director: Other financial or material support; International Spine Study Group (ISSG): Research support; International Spine Study Group (ISSG)—Executive Committee: Other financial or material support; K2M: IP royalties; Paid consultant; Medicrea: IP royalties; Paid consultant; Medtronic: Paid consultant; Next Orthosurgical: IP royalties; Nuvasive: IP royalties; Operative Neurosurgery—Editorial Board: Other financial or material support; Scoliosis Research Society (SRS)—Grant Funding: Other financial or material support; Stryker: IP royalties; Titan Spine: Research support. J.S.S.: Alphatec Spine: Stock or stock Options; Carlsmed: Paid consultant; Cerapedics: Paid consultant; DePuy: Research support; DePuy, A Johnson & Johnson Company: Paid consultant; Journal of Neurosurgery Spine : Editorial or governing board; Neurosurgery: Editorial or governing board; Nuvasive: IP royalties; Paid consultant; Research support; Operative Neurosurgery: Editorial or governing board; Scoliosis Research Society: Board or committee member; Spine Deformity : Editorial or governing board; Stryker: Paid consultant; Thieme: Publishing royalties, financial or material support; Zimmer: IP royalties; paid consultant. The remaining authors declare no conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2023 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

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.

Study Design: Retrospective cohort study., Objectives: Identify optimal lumbar lordosis in adult deformity correction to achieve age-adjusted targets and sustained alignment., Methods: Surgical adult spinal deformity patients reaching an age-adjusted ideal alignment at one year were identified. Multilinear regression analysis was used to identify the relationship between regional curvatures (LL and TK) that enabled achievement of a given global alignment (T1 pelvic angle, TPA) based on pelvic incidence (PI)., Results: 347 patients out of 1048 available reached their age-adjusted TPA within 5° (60-year-old, 72% women, body mass index 29 ± 6.2). They had a significant improvement in all sagittal parameters (except PI) from pre-operative baseline to 1 year following surgery ( P < .001). Multilinear regression predicting L1-S1 based on TK, TPA, and PI demonstrated excellent results (R2 = .85). Simplification of the coefficients of prediction combined with a conversion to an age-based formula led to the following: LL = PI - 0.3TK - 0.5Age + 10. Internal validation of the formula led to a mean error of -.4°, and an absolute error of 5.0°. Internal validation on patients with an age-adjusted alignment revealed similar accuracy across the entire age-adjusted TPA spectrum (ranges of LL errors: ME = .2° to 1.7°, AE = 4.0° to 5.3°)., Conclusion: This study provides a simple guideline to identify the amount of LL needed to reach a given alignment (i.e., age-adjusted target) based on PI and associated TK. Implementation of this predictive formula during pre-operative surgical planning may help to reduce unexpected sub-optimal post-operative alignment outcomes., Competing Interests: Declaration of Conflicting InterestsThe author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Background: Postoperative reciprocal changes (RC) in the cervical spine associated with varying factors of proximal junctional kyphosis (PJK) following fusions of the thoracopelvic spine are poorly understood., Purpose: Explore reciprocal changes in the cervical spine associated with varying factors (severity, progression, patient age) of PJK in patients undergoing adult spinal deformity (ASD) correction., Patients and Methods: Retrospective review of a multicenter ASD database., Inclusion: ASD patients > 18 y/o, undergoing fusions from the thoracic spine (UIV: T6-T12) to the pelvis with two-year radiographic data. ASD was defined as: Coronal Cobb angle ≥ 20°, Sagittal Vertical Axis ≥ 5 cm, Pelvic Tilt ≥ 25°, and/or Thoracic Kyphosis ≥ 60°. PJK was defined as a ≥ 10° measure of the sagittal Cobb angle between the inferior endplate of the UIV and the superior endplate of the UIV + 2. Patients were grouped by mild (M; 10°-20°) and severe (S; > 20°) PJK at one year. Propensity Score Matching (PSM) controlled for CCI, age, PI and UIV. Unpaired and paired t test analyses determined difference between RC parameters and change between time points. Pearson bi-variate correlations analyzed associations between RC parameters (T4-T12, TS-CL, cSVA, C2-Slope, and T1-Slope) and PJK descriptors., Results: 284 ASD patients (UIV: T6: 1.1%; T7: 0.7%; T8: 4.6%; T9: 9.9%; T10: 58.8%; T11: 19.4%; T12: 5.6%) were studied. PJK analysis consisted of 182 patients (Mild = 91 and Severe = 91). Significant difference between M and S groups were observed in T4-T12 Δ1Y(- 16.8 v - 22.8, P = 0.001), TS-CLΔ1Y(- 0.6 v 2.8, P = 0.037), cSVAΔ1Y(- 1.8 v 1.9, P = 0.032), and C2 slopeΔ1Y(- 1.6 v 2.3, P = 0.022). By two years post-op, all changes in cervical alignment parameters were similar between mild and severe groups. Correlation between age and cSVAΔ1Y(R = 0.153, P = 0.034) was found. Incidence of severe PJK was found to correlate with TS-CLΔ1Y(R = 0.142, P = 0.049), cSVAΔ1Y(R = 0.171, P = 0.018), C2SΔ1Y(R = 0.148, P = 0.040), and T1SΔ2Y(R = 0.256, P = 0.003)., Conclusions: Compensation within the cervical spine differed between individuals with mild and severe PJK at one year postoperatively. However, similar levels of pathologic change in cervical alignment parameters were seen by two years, highlighting the progression of cervical compensation due to mild PJK over time. These findings provide greater evidence for the development of cervical deformity in individuals presenting with proximal junctional kyphosis., (© 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Scoliosis Research Society.)

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., Competing Interests: The authors report no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2023 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

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 (R 2 = .981). Cost-per-QALY at 2Y increased by $122,650 per risk factor (R 2 = .794). Adjusted generalized linear model demonstrated a significant trend between increasing risk score and increasing cost-utility (r 2 = .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., Competing Interests: Declaration of Conflicting InterestsThe author(s) declared the following potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: Peter Gust Passias, MDAllosource: Other financial or material support Cervical Scoliosis Research Society: Research support Globus Medical: Paid presenter or speaker Medtronic: Paid consultant Royal Biologics: Paid consultant Spine: Editorial or governing board SpineWave: Paid consultant Terumo: Paid consultant Zimmer: Paid presenter or speaker. Virginie Lafage, PhD DePuy, A Johnson & Johnson Company: Paid presenter or speaker European Spine Journal: Editorial or governing board Globus Medical: Paid consultant International Spine Study Group: Board or committee member Nuvasive: IP royalties Scoliosis Research Society: Board or committee member The Permanente Medical Group: Paid presenter or speaker. Ferran Pellise, MDAOSpine Deformity Knowledge Forum: Board or committee member DePuy, A Johnson & Johnson Company: Research support European Spine Journal: Editorial or governing board EuroSpine, The Spine Society of Europe: Board or committee member Medtronic: Paid consultant; Research support Scoliosis Research Society: Board or committee member Spanish Spine Society, GEER: Board or committee member Stryker: Paid consultant. Renaud Lafage, MS Nemaris: Stock or stock Options. Munish C Gupta, MD. AO Spine Faculty, travel: Board or committee memberDePuy, A Johnson & Johnson Company: IP royalties; Paid consultant; Paid presenter or speaker European Spine Journal-Advisory Board: Editorial or governing board Global Spine Journal-Reviewer: Editorial or governing board Globus Medical: IP royalties; Paid consultant honorarium for faculty: Board or committee member Innomed: IP royalties Johnson & Johnson: Stock or stock Options Medtronic: Paid consultant Spine Deformity, Reviewer: Editorial or governing board SRS-Board of Directors: Board or committee member SRS-IMAST & Education committee: Board or committee member travel: Board or committee member Wolters Kluwer Health - Lippincott Williams & Wilkins: Publishing royalties, financial or material support. Michael Patrick Kelly, MD, MSc, AO Spine: Board or committee memberCervical Spine Research Society: Board or committee member Scoliosis Research Society: Board or committee member Spine: Editorial or governing board. Han Jo Kim, MDAAOS: Board or committee member Alphatec Spine: Paid consultant AO SPINE: Board or committee member Cervical Spine Research Society: Board or committee member HSS Journal, Asian Spine Journal: Editorial or governing board ISSGF: Research support K2M: IP royalties Scoliosis Research Society: Board or committee member Zimmer: IP royalties. Khaled M Kebaish, MDDePuy, A Johnson & Johnson Company: IP royalties; Paid consultant; Paid presenter or speaker; Research support Orthofix, Inc.: IP royalties; Paid consultant Orthofix, Inc., K2 medical Inc: Paid presenter or speaker Scoliosis Research Society: Board or committee member Stryker: IP royalties. Alan H Daniels, MDEOS: Paid consultant Medicrea: Paid consultant Medtronic Sofamor Danek: Paid consultant Novabone: Paid consultant Orthofix, Inc.: Paid consultant; Research support Southern Spine: IP royalties Spineart: IP royalties; Paid consultant Springer: Publishing royalties, financial or material support Stryker: Paid consultant. Andrew J Schoenfeld, MDAAOS: Board or committee member Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery - American: Editorial or governing board North American Spine Society: Board or committee member Spine: Editorial or governing board Springer: Publishing royalties, financial or material support Wolters Kluwer Health - Lippincott Williams & Wilkins: Publishing royalties, financial or material support. Jeffrey Gum, MDAcuity: IP royalties; Paid consultant Alan L. & Jacqueline B. Stuart Spine Research: Research support Cerapedics: Research support Cingulate Therapeutics: Stock or stock Options DePuy, A Johnson & Johnson Company: Paid presenter or speaker Global Spine Journal - Reviewer: Editorial or governing board Intellirod Spine Inc.: Research support K2M /Stryker: Board or committee member MAZOR Surgical Technologies: Paid consultant Medtronic: Board or committee member; Paid consultant; Research support Norton Healthcare: Research support Nuvasive: IP royalties; Paid consultant Pfizer: Research support Scoliosis Research Society: Research support Spine Deformity - Reviewer: Editorial or governing board Stryker: Paid consultant; Paid presenter or speaker Texas Scottish Rite Hospital: Research support The Spine Journal - Reviewer: Editorial or governing board. Themistocles Stavros Protopsaltis, MDAltus: IP royalties Globus Medical: Paid consultant Medicrea: Paid consultant Medtronic: Paid consultant Nuvasive: Paid consultant Spine Align: Stock or stock Options Stryker: Paid consultant Torus Medical: Stock or stock Options. Ibrahim ObeidAlphatec Spine: IP royalties; Paid consultant Clariance: IP royalties DePuy, A Johnson & Johnson Company: Paid consultant; Paid presenter or speaker; Research support Medtronic Sofamor Danek: Paid consultant; Paid presenter or speaker SPINEART: IP royalties. Gregory Michael Mundis Jr, MDCarlsmed: Paid consultant ISSGF: Research support K2M: IP royalties Nuvasive: IP royalties; Paid consultant; Research support Scoliosis Research Society: Board or committee member SeaSpine: Paid consultant Stryker: Paid consultant Viseon: Paid consultant. Dean Chou, MDGlobus Medical: IP royalties; Paid consultant Orthofix, Inc.: Paid consultant. Ahmet Alanay, MDDePuy, A Johnson & Johnson Company: Research support European Spine Journal: Editorial or governing board Globus Medical: Paid consultant Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery - American: Editorial or governing board Medtronic: Research support Scoliosis Research Society: Board or committee member ZimVie: IP royalties; Paid consultant. Eric O Klineberg, MDAO Spine: Paid presenter or speaker; Research support DePuy, A Johnson & Johnson Company: Paid consultant Medicrea: Paid consultant Medtronic: Paid consultant Stryker: Paid consultant. Breton G Line, BSISSGF: Paid consultant. Robert A Hart, MD, FAAOSAmerican Orthopaedic Association: Board or committee member Cervical Spine Research Society: Board or committee member DePuy, A Johnson & Johnson Company: IP royalties; Paid consultant; Paid presenter or speaker Globus Medical: IP royalties; Paid consultant; Paid presenter or speaker International Spine Study Group: Board or committee member ISSLS Textbook of the Lumbar Spine: Editorial or governing board Medtronic: Paid consultant; Paid presenter or speaker North American Spine Society: Board or committee member Orthofix, Inc.: Paid consultant; Paid presenter or speaker Scoliosis Research Society: Board or committee member SeaSpine: IP royalties Spine Connect: Stock or stock Options Western Ortho Assn: Board or committee member. Douglas C Burton, MD, FAAOSBioventus: Research support DePuy, A Johnson & Johnson Company: IP royalties; Paid consultant; Research support Pfizer: Research support Progenerative Medical: Stock or stock Options Scoliosis Research Society: Board or committee member Spine Deformity: Editorial or governing board. Frank J Schwab, MDDePuy, A Johnson & Johnson Company: Research support Globus Medical: Paid consultant; Paid presenter or speaker K2M: IP royalties; Paid consultant; Paid presenter or speaker Medicrea: Paid consultant Medtronic: Paid consultant Medtronic Sofamor Danek: IP royalties; Paid presenter or speaker Nuvasive: Research support Scoliosis Research Society: Board or committee member spine deformity: Editorial or governing board Stryker: Research support VP of International Spine Society Group (ISSG): Board or committee member Zimmer: IP royalties; Paid consultant; Paid presenter or speaker. Christopher I Shaffrey, MDAANS: Board or committee member Cervical Spine Research Society: Board or committee member DePuy, A Johnson & Johnson Company: Paid presenter or speaker; Research support Globus Medical: Research support Medtronic: Other financial or material support; Paid consultant Medtronic Sofamor Danek: IP royalties; Paid presenter or speaker; Research support Neurosurgery RRC: Board or committee member Nuvasive: IP royalties; Paid consultant; Paid presenter or speaker; Research support; Stock or stock Options Proprio: Paid consultant Scoliosis Research Society: Board or committee member SI Bone: IP royalties Spinal Deformity: Editorial or governing board Spine: Editorial or governing board. Robert Shay Bess, MDallosource: Paid consultant; Research support Biomet: Research support DePuy, A Johnson & Johnson Company: Paid consultant; Research support EOS: Research support Globus Medical: Research support k2 medical: IP royalties; Paid consultant; Paid presenter or speaker; Research support Medtronic Sofamor Danek: Research support North American Spine Society: Board or committee member Nuvasive: IP royalties; Research support Orthofix, Inc.: Research support Scoliosis Research Society: Board or committee member Stryker: IP royalties; Paid presenter or speaker. Christopher Ames, MD Biomet Spine: IP royalties DePuy, A Johnson & Johnson Company: IP royalties; Paid consultant; Research support Global Spine Analytics - Director: Other financial or material support International Spine Study Group (ISSG): Research support International Spine Study Group (ISSG) - Executive Committee: Other financial or material support K2M: IP royalties; Paid consultant Medicrea: IP royalties; Paid consultant Medtronic: Paid consultant Next Orthosurgical: IP royalties Nuvasive: IP royalties Operative Neurosurgery - Editorial Board: Other financial or material support Scoliosis Research Society (SRS) - Grant Funding: Other financial or material support Stryker: IP royalties Titan Spine: Research support. Justin S Smith, MDAlphatec Spine: Stock or stock Options Carlsmed: Paid consultant Cerapedics: Paid consultant DePuy: Research support DePuy, A Johnson & Johnson Company: Paid consultant Journal of Neurosurgery Spine: Editorial or governing board Neurosurgery: Editorial or governing board Nuvasive: IP royalties; Paid consultant; Research support Operative Neurosurgery: Editorial or governing board Scoliosis Research Society: Board or committee member Spine Deformity: Editorial or governing board Stryker: Paid consultant Thieme: Publishing royalties, financial or material support Zimmer: IP royalties; Paid consultant.

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., Competing Interests: Disclosure: The Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest forms are provided with the online version of the article ( http://links.lww.com/JBJS/H620 )., (Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, Incorporated. All rights reserved.)

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., Competing Interests: Declaration of Conflicting InterestsThe author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Objective: The goal of this study was to determine if patients with mild scoliosis and age-appropriate sagittal alignment have favorable outcomes following surgical correction., Methods: Retrospective review of a prospective, multicenter adult spinal deformity database. Inclusion criteria: operative patients age ≥18 years, and preoperative pelvic tilt, mismatch between pelvic incidence and lumbar lordosis (PI-LL), and C7 sagittal vertical axis all within established age-adjusted thresholds with minimum 2-year follow-up. Health-related quality of life (HRQoL) scores: Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), 36-item Short Form health survey (SF-36), Scoliosis Research Society-22R (SRS22R), back/leg pain Numerical Rating Scale and minimum clinically important difference (MCID)/substantial clinical benefit (SCB). Two-year and preoperative HRQoL radiographic data were compared. Patients with mild scoliosis (Mild Scoli, Max coronal Cobb 10°-30°) were compared to those with larger curves (Scoli)., Results: One hundred fifty-one patients included from 667 operative patients (82.8% women; average age, 56.4 ± 16.2 years). Forty-two patients (27.8%) included in Mild Scoli group. Mild Scoli group had significantly worse baseline leg pain, ODI, and physical composite scores (p < 0.02). Mean 2-year maximum coronal Cobb angle was significantly improved compared to baseline (p < 0.001). All 2-year HRQoL measures were significantly improved compared to (p < 0.001) except mental composite score, SRS activity and SRS mental for the Mild Scoli group (p > 0.05). From the mild Scoli group, 36%-74% met either MCID or SCB for the HRQoL measures. Sixty-four point three percent had minimum 1 complication, 28.6% had a major complication, 35.7% had reoperation., Conclusion: Mild scoliosis patients with age-appropriate sagittal alignment benefit from surgical correction, decompression, and stabilization at 2 years postoperative despite having a high complication rate.

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.

Objectives: We examined sociodemographic, clinical, and behavioral factors associated with previous incarceration among people with diagnosed HIV to inform HIV care efforts for this population., Methods: We used 2015-2017 data from a cross-sectional, nationally representative sample of US adults with diagnosed HIV (N = 11 739). We computed weighted percentages and 95% CIs to compare the characteristics of people with HIV incarcerated in the past 12 months (ie, recently) with people with HIV not recently incarcerated. We used adjusted prevalence ratios (aPRs) with predicted marginal means to examine associations between selected factors and incarceration status., Results: Adults with HIV who were recently incarcerated, when compared with those who were not, were more likely to be aged 18-29 years (prevalence ratio [PR] = 2.51), non-Hispanic Black (PR = 1.39), less educated (