Lumbar Lordosis Redistribution and Segmental Correction in Adult Spinal Deformity (ASD): Does it Matter?

Abstract

Study design

Retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data.

Objective

Evaluate the impact of correcting to normative segmental lordosis values on post-operative outcomes.

Background

Restoring lumbar lordosis magnitude is crucial in adult spinal deformity surgery, but the optimal location and segmental distribution remains unclear.

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 under- and over-corrected. Surgical technique, PROMs, and surgical complications were compared across groups at baseline and 2-year.

Results

510 patients with an average age of 64.6, mean CCI 2.08, and average 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 ODI 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 (PJF) (U: 16.0% vs. M: 15.6% vs. O: 32.8%, P<0.001) and had greater posterior inclination of the upper instrumented vertebra (UIV) (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 PJF with overcorrection and increased rates of implant failure with undercorrection based on normative segmental lordosis.

Level of evidence

IV.

Department

Description

Provenance

Citation

Published Version (Please cite this version)

10.1097/brs.0000000000004930

Publication Info

Diebo, Bassel G, Mariah Balmaceno-Criss, Renaud Lafage, Mohammad Daher, Manjot Singh, D Kojo Hamilton, Justin S Smith, Robert K Eastlack, et al. (2024). Lumbar Lordosis Redistribution and Segmental Correction in Adult Spinal Deformity (ASD): Does it Matter?. Spine. 10.1097/brs.0000000000004930 Retrieved from https://hdl.handle.net/10161/29919.

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.


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.