The likelihood of reaching minimum clinically important difference and substantial clinical benefit at 2 years following a 3-column osteotomy: analysis of 140 patients.

Abstract

Object

Three-column osteotomies (3COs) are technically challenging techniques for correcting severe rigid spinal deformities. The impact of these interventions on outcomes reaching minimum clinically important difference (MCID) or substantial clinical benefit (SCB) is unclear. The objective of this study was to determine the rates of MCID and SCB in standard health-related quality of life (HRQOL) measures after 3COs in patients with adult spinal deformity (ASD). The impacts of location of the uppermost instrumented vertebra (UIV) on clinical outcomes and of maintenance on sagittal correction at 2 years postoperatively were also examined.

Methods

The authors conducted a retrospective multicenter analysis of the records from adult patients who underwent 3CO with complete 2-year radiographic and clinical follow-ups. Cases were categorized according to established radiographic thresholds for pelvic tilt (> 22°), sagittal vertical axis (> 4.7 cm), and the mismatch between pelvic incidence and lumbar lordosis (> 11°). The cases were also analyzed on the basis of a UIV in the upper thoracic (T1-6) or thoracolumbar (T9-L1) region. Patient-reported outcome measures evaluated preoperatively and 2 years postoperatively included Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores, the Physical Component Summary and Mental Component Summary (MCS) scores of the 36-Item Short Form Health Survey, and Scoliosis Research Society-22 questionnaire (SRS-22) scores. The percentages of patients whose outcomes for these measures met MCID and SCB were compared among the groups.

Results

Data from 140 patients (101 women and 39 men) were included in the analysis; the average patient age was 57.3 ± 12.4 years (range 20-82 years). Of these patients, 94 had undergone only pedicle subtraction osteotomy (PSO) and 42 only vertebral column resection (VCR); 113 patients had a UIV in the upper thoracic (n = 63) orthoracolumbar region (n = 50). On average, 2 years postoperatively the patients had significantly improved in all HRQOL measures except the MCS score. For the entire patient cohort, the improvements ranged from 57.6% for the SRS-22 pain score MCID to 24.4% for the ODI score SCB. For patients undergoing PSO or VCR, the likelihood of their outcomes reaching MCID or SCB ranged from 24.3% to 62.3% and from 16.2% to 47.8%, respectively. The SRS-22 self-image score of patients who had a UIV in the upper thoracic region reached MCID significantly more than that of patients who had a UIV in the thoracolumbar region (70.6% vs 41.9%, p = 0.0281). All other outcomes were similar for UIVs of upper thoracic and thoracolumbar regions. Comparison of patients whose spines were above or below the radiographic thresholds associated with disability indicated similar rates of meeting MCID and SCB for HRQOL at the 2-year follow-up.

Conclusions

Outcomes for patients having UIVs in the upper thoracic region were no more likely to meet MCID or SCB than for those having UIVs in the thoracolumbar region, except for the MCID in the SRS-22 self-image measure. The HRQOL outcomes in patients who had optimal sagittal correction according to radiographic thresholds determined preoperatively were not significantly more likely to reach MCID or SCB at the 2-year follow-up. Future work needs to determine whether the Schwab preoperative radiographic thresholds for severe disability apply in postoperative settings.

Department

Description

Provenance

Citation

Published Version (Please cite this version)

10.3171/2014.12.spine141031

Publication Info

Fakurnejad, Shayan, Justin K Scheer, Virginie Lafage, Justin S Smith, Vedat Deviren, Richard Hostin, Gregory M Mundis, Douglas C Burton, et al. (2015). The likelihood of reaching minimum clinically important difference and substantial clinical benefit at 2 years following a 3-column osteotomy: analysis of 140 patients. Journal of neurosurgery. Spine, 23(3). pp. 340–348. 10.3171/2014.12.spine141031 Retrieved from https://hdl.handle.net/10161/28497.

This is constructed from limited available data and may be imprecise. To cite this article, please review & use the official citation provided by the journal.

Scholars@Duke

Shaffrey

Christopher Ignatius Shaffrey

Professor of Orthopaedic Surgery

I have more than 25 years of experience treating patients of all ages with spinal disorders. I have had an interest in the management of spinal disorders since starting my medical education. I performed residencies in both orthopaedic surgery and neurosurgery to gain a comprehensive understanding of the entire range of spinal disorders. My goal has been to find innovative ways to manage the range of spinal conditions, straightforward to complex. I have a focus on managing patients with complex spinal disorders. My patient evaluation and management philosophy is to provide engaged, compassionate care that focuses on providing the simplest and least aggressive treatment option for a particular condition. In many cases, non-operative treatment options exist to improve a patient’s symptoms. I have been actively engaged in clinical research to find the best ways to manage spinal disorders in order to achieve better results with fewer complications.


Unless otherwise indicated, scholarly articles published by Duke faculty members are made available here with a CC-BY-NC (Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial) license, as enabled by the Duke Open Access Policy. If you wish to use the materials in ways not already permitted under CC-BY-NC, please consult the copyright owner. Other materials are made available here through the author’s grant of a non-exclusive license to make their work openly accessible.