Sagittal realignment failures following pedicle subtraction osteotomy surgery: are we doing enough?: Clinical article.

dc.contributor.author

Schwab, Frank J

dc.contributor.author

Patel, Ashish

dc.contributor.author

Shaffrey, Christopher I

dc.contributor.author

Smith, Justin S

dc.contributor.author

Farcy, Jean-Pierre

dc.contributor.author

Boachie-Adjei, Oheneba

dc.contributor.author

Hostin, Richard A

dc.contributor.author

Hart, Robert A

dc.contributor.author

Akbarnia, Behrooz A

dc.contributor.author

Burton, Douglas C

dc.contributor.author

Bess, Shay

dc.contributor.author

Lafage, Virginie

dc.date.accessioned

2023-08-30T00:18:07Z

dc.date.available

2023-08-30T00:18:07Z

dc.date.issued

2012-06

dc.date.updated

2023-08-30T00:18:06Z

dc.description.abstract

Object

Pedicle subtraction osteotomy (PSO) is a surgical procedure that is frequently performed on patients with sagittal spinopelvic malalignment. Although it allows for substantial spinopelvic realignment, suboptimal realignment outcomes have been reported in up to 33% of patients. The authors' objective in the present study was to identify differences in radiographic profiles and surgical procedures between patients achieving successful versus failed spinopelvic realignment following PSO.

Methods

This study is a multicenter retrospective consecutive PSO case series. The authors evaluated 99 cases involving patients who underwent PSO for sagittal spinopelvic malalignment. Because precise cutoffs of acceptable residual postoperative sagittal vertical axis (SVA) values have not been well defined, comparisons were focused between patient groups with a postoperative SVA that could be clearly considered either a success or a failure. Only cases in which the patients had a postoperative SVA of less than 50 mm (successful PSO realignment) or more than 100 mm (failed PSO realignment) were included in the analysis. Radiographic measures and PSO parameters were compared between successful and failed PSO realignments.

Results

Seventy-nine patients met the inclusion criteria. Successful realignment was achieved in 61 patients (77%), while realignment failed in 18 (23%). Patients with failed realignment had larger preoperative SVA (mean 217.9 vs 106.7 mm, p < 0.01), larger pelvic tilt (mean 36.9° vs 30.7°, p < 0.01), larger pelvic incidence (mean 64.2° vs 53.7°, p < 0.01), and greater lumbar lordosis-pelvic incidence mismatch (-47.1° vs -30.9°, p < 0.01) compared with those in whom realignment was successful. Failed and successful realignments were similar regarding the vertebral level of the PSO, the median size of wedge resection 22.0° (interquartile range 16.5°-28.5°), and the numerical changes in pre- and postoperative spinopelvic parameters (p > 0.05).

Conclusions

Patients with failed PSO realignments had significantly larger preoperative spinopelvic deformity than patients in whom realignment was successful. Despite their apparent need for greater correction, the patients in the failed realignment group only received the same amount of correction as those in the successfully realigned patients. A single-level standard PSO may not achieve optimal outcome in patients with high preoperative spinopelvic sagittal malalignment. Patients with large spinopelvic deformities should receive larger osteotomies or additional corrective procedures beyond PSOs to avoid undercorrection.
dc.identifier.issn

1547-5654

dc.identifier.issn

1547-5646

dc.identifier.uri

https://hdl.handle.net/10161/28863

dc.language

eng

dc.publisher

Journal of Neurosurgery Publishing Group (JNSPG)

dc.relation.ispartof

Journal of neurosurgery. Spine

dc.relation.isversionof

10.3171/2012.2.spine11120

dc.subject

Pelvis

dc.subject

Spine

dc.subject

Humans

dc.subject

Kyphosis

dc.subject

Scoliosis

dc.subject

Radiography

dc.subject

Treatment Failure

dc.subject

Osteotomy

dc.subject

Retrospective Studies

dc.subject

Age Factors

dc.subject

Adult

dc.subject

Aged

dc.subject

Middle Aged

dc.subject

Female

dc.subject

Male

dc.title

Sagittal realignment failures following pedicle subtraction osteotomy surgery: are we doing enough?: Clinical article.

dc.type

Journal article

duke.contributor.orcid

Shaffrey, Christopher I|0000-0001-9760-8386

pubs.begin-page

539

pubs.end-page

546

pubs.issue

6

pubs.organisational-group

Duke

pubs.organisational-group

School of Medicine

pubs.organisational-group

Clinical Science Departments

pubs.organisational-group

Orthopaedic Surgery

pubs.organisational-group

Neurosurgery

pubs.publication-status

Published

pubs.volume

16

Files

Original bundle

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
j-neurosurg-spine-article-p539.pdf
Size:
2.78 MB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format