Pierce, Katherine EPassias, Peter GustBrown, Avery EBortz, Cole AAlas, HaddyLafage, RenaudKrol, OscarChou, DeanBurton, Douglas CLine, BretonKlineberg, EricHart, RobertGum, JeffreyDaniels, AlanHamilton, KojoBess, ShayProtopsaltis, ThemistoclesShaffrey, ChristopherSchwab, Frank ASmith, Justin SLafage, VirginieAmes, ChristopherInternational Spine Study Group2023-06-162023-06-162021-070974-82370976-9285https://hdl.handle.net/10161/28089<h4>Background</h4>To optimize quality of life in patients with cervical deformity (CD), there may be alignment targets to be prioritized.<h4>Objective</h4>To prioritize the cervical parameter targets for alignment.<h4>Methods</h4>Included: CD patients (C2-C7 Cobb >10^°°, C2-C7 lordosis [CL] >10^°°, cSVA > 4 cm, or chin-brow vertical angle >25^°°) with full baseline (BL) and 1-year (1Y) radiographic parameters and Neck Disability Index (NDI) scores; patients with cervical (C) or cervicothoracic (CT) Primary Driver Ames type. Patients with BL Ames classified as low CD for both parameters of cSVA (<4 cm) and T1 slope minus CL (TS-CL) (<15^°°) were excluded. Patients assessed: Meeting Minimal Clinically Important Difference (MCID) for NDI (<-15 ΔNDI). Ratios of correction were found for regional parameters categorized by Primary Ames Driver (C or CT). Decision tree analysis assessed cut-offs for differences associated with meeting NDI MCID at 1Y.<h4>Results</h4>Seventy-seven CD patients (62.1 years, 64%F, 28.8 kg/m²). 41.6% met MCID for NDI. A backward linear regression model including radiographic differences as predictors from BL to 1Y for meeting MCID for NDI demonstrated an <i>R</i> ²= 0.820 (<i>P</i> = 0.032) included TS-CL, cSVA, MGS, C2SS, C2-T3 angle, C2-T3 sagittal vertical axis (SVA), CL. By primary Ames driver, 67.5% of patients were C, and 32.5% CT. Ratios of change in predictors for MCID NDI patients for C and CT were not significant between the two groups (<i>P</i> > 0.050). Decision tree analysis determined cut-offs for radiographic change, prioritizing in the following order: ≥42.5^° C2-T3 angle, >35.4^° CL, <-31.76^° C2 slope, <-11.57 mm cSVA, <-2.16^° MGS, >-30.8 mm C2-T3 SVA, and ≤-33.6^° TS-CL.<h4>Conclusions</h4>Certain ratios of correction of cervical parameters contribute to improving neck disability. Prioritizing these radiographic alignment parameters may help optimize patient-reported outcomes for patients undergoing CD surgery.International Spine Study GroupJournal article2023-06-16