Impact of magnitude and percentage of global sagittal plane correction on health-related quality of life at 2-years follow-up.

Abstract

Background

Sagittal plane malalignment has been established as the main radiographic driver of disability in adult spinal deformity (ASD).

Objective

To evaluate the amount of sagittal correction needed for a patient to perceive improvement (minimal clinically important difference, MCID) in health-related quality of life (HRQOL) scores.

Methods

This was a multicenter, retrospective analysis of prospectively consecutively enrolled ASD patients. Inclusion criterion was a sagittal vertical axis (SVA) >80 mm. Demographic, radiographic, and HRQOL preoperative and 2-year postsurgery data were collected. Surgical treatment was categorized based on SVA correction: <60 mm, 60 mm to 120 mm, and >120 mm. Changes in parameters were analyzed using paired t test, 1-way analysis of variance, and χ2 test.

Results

Seventy-six patients (preoperative SVA = 140 mm) were analyzed; each subgroup revealed significant HRQOL improvements following surgery. Compared with the <60 mm correction group, the likelihood of reaching MCID was significantly improved for the >120 mm group (Oswestry Disability Index) but not for the 60 mm to 120 mm group. A significantly greater likelihood of reaching MCID thresholds was observed for corrections above 66% of preoperative SVA.

Conclusion

Best HRQOL outcomes for ASD patients with severe sagittal plane deformity were obtained with a correction >120 mm for SVA and at least 66% of correction. Although lesser amounts of SVA correction yielded clinical improvement, the rate of MCID threshold improvement was not significantly different for mild or modest corrections. These results underline the need for complete sagittal plane deformity correction if high rates of HRQOL benefit are sought for patients with marked sagittal plane deformity.

Department

Description

Provenance

Subjects

Humans, Scoliosis, Radiographic Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted, Treatment Outcome, Prevalence, Sensitivity and Specificity, Follow-Up Studies, Reproducibility of Results, Recovery of Function, Quality of Life, Middle Aged, United States, Female, Male

Citation

Published Version (Please cite this version)

10.1227/neu.0b013e31825d20c0

Publication Info

Blondel, Benjamin, Frank Schwab, Benjamin Ungar, Justin Smith, Keith Bridwell, Steven Glassman, Christopher Shaffrey, Jean-Pierre Farcy, et al. (2012). Impact of magnitude and percentage of global sagittal plane correction on health-related quality of life at 2-years follow-up. Neurosurgery, 71(2). pp. 341–348. 10.1227/neu.0b013e31825d20c0 Retrieved from https://hdl.handle.net/10161/28860.

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.