Correction of sagittal imbalance after previous surgical interventions for degenerative lumbar spine disease
https://doi.org/10.14531/ss2022.2.47-56
Abstract
Objective. To analyze clinical and radiological results of corrective fusion in the lumbar spine in the treatment of patients with sagittal imbalance after previous surgical interventions.
Material and Methods. A retrospective monocentric study, clinical case series. The data of 18 patients operated on using a combination of surgical methods with obligatory anterior corrective fusion at the L4–L5 and/or L5–S1 levels to achieve optimal parameters of the sagittal balance disturbed or developed after previous interventions were analyzed. Clinical and radiological parameters were assessed during hospital stay and at least 10 months later.
Results. The study presents data from 3 (16.7 %) men and 15 (83.3 %) women with an average age of 57.5 ± 9.1 years. Average length of hospital stay was 26.9 ± 10.1 days. In 7 (38.9 %) cases, the deformity occurred at the previously operated level and in 11 (61.1 %) – at the adjacent one. The duration of surgery was 481.4 ± 101.7 minutes, and blood loss was 1028.9 ± 594.9 ml. Back and leg pain VAS scores decreased in 10–19 months after surgery from 6.4 ± 0.9 and 4.8 ± 1.3 to 3.2 ± 1.2 and 0.9 ± 0.8, respectively (p < 0.001). The ODI score decreased from 59.6 ± 5.9 to 39.9 ± 7.7 (p < 0.001). The ideal Roussouly type was restored in 11 (61.1 %) cases, below ideal – in 3 (16.7 %), and overcorrection – in 4 (22.2 %). LL increased from 48.1 ± 13.6 ° to 56.9 ± 11.6 ° (p < 0.001), and LDI – from 40.1 ± 16.9 to 58.8 ± 10.3 (p <0.001); SVA decreased from 5.1 ± 1.9 to 3.4 ± 2.1 cm (p < 0.001), PT – from 23.9° ± 7.2° to 19.1° ± 3.8° (p < 0.001). According to GAP score, the number of patients with severe and moderate disproportion was reduced (p < 0.001). Perioperative complications were observed in 12 (66.7 %) patients.
Conclusion. Multi-stage surgical correction of the residual and aggravated sagittal imbalance with obligatory anterior corrective interbody fusion after instrumental correction of degenerative spinal deformity through the posterior approach significantly improves clinical and radiological parameters and allows restoring a harmonious sagittal profile in 61.1 % of cases.
About the Authors
E. S. BaikovRussian Federation
MD, PhD, neurosurgeon
A. V. Peleganchuk
Russian Federation
MD, PhD, Department of Neurosurgery No. 2
A. J. Sanginov
Russian Federation
MD, PhD, Department of Neurosurgery No. 2
O. N. Leonova
Russian Federation
PhD, MD, senior researcher
A. V. Krutko
Russian Federation
DMSc, neurosurgeon, leading researcher
References
1. Rajaee SS, Bae HW, Kanim LEA, Delamarter RB. Spinal fusion in the United States: analysis of trends from 1998 to 2008. Spine. 2012;37:67–76. DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e31820cccfb.
2. Rajaee SS, Kanim LEA, Bae HW. National trends in revision spinal fusion in the USA: patient characteristics and complications. Bone Joint J. 2014;96-B:807–816. DOI: 10.1302/0301-620X.96B6.31149.
3. Байков Е.С., Пелеганчук А.В., Сангинов А.Д., Леонова О.Н., Крутько А.В. Хирургическая коррекция сагиттального дисбаланса поясничного отдела позвоночника дегенеративного генеза // Хирургия позвоночника. 2020. Т. 17. № 2.
4. С. 49–57. [Baikov ES, Peleganhuk AV, Sanginov AJ, Leonova ON, Krutko AV. Surgical correction of degenerative sagittal imbalance of the lumbar spine. Hir. Pozvonoc. 202;17(2):49–57]. DOI: 10.14531/ss2020.2.49-57.
5. Chen WJ, Lai PL, Tai CL, Chen LH, Niu CC. The effect of sagittal alignment on adjacent joint mobility after lumbar instrumentation – a biomechanical study of lumbar vertebrae in a porcine model. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon). 2004;19:763–768. DOI: 10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2004.05.010.
6. Djurasovic MO, Carreon LY, Glassman SD, Dimar JR 2nd, Puno RM, Johnson JR. Sagittal alignment as a risk factor for adjacent level degeneration: a case-control study. Orthopedics. 2008;31:546.
7. Басанкин И.В., Пташников Д.А., Масевнин С.В., Афаунов А.А., Гюльзатян А.А., Тахмазян К.К. Значимость различных факторов риска в формировании проксимального переходного кифоза и нестабильности металлоконструкции при оперативном лечении взрослых с деформациями позвоночника // Хирургия позвоночника. 2021. Т. 18. № 1. С. 14–23. [Basankin IV, Ptashnikov DA, Masevnin SV, Afaunov AA, Giulzatyan AA, Takhmazyan KK. Significance of various risk factors for proximal junctional kyphosis and instability of instrumentation in surgical treatment for adult spinal deformities. Hir. Pozvonoc. 2021;18(1):14–23]. DOI: 10.14531/ss2021.1.14-23.
8. Lee CH, Chung CK, Jang JS, Kim SM, Chin DK, Lee JK, Yoon SH, Hong JT, Ha Y, Kim CH, Hyun SJ. Effectiveness of deformity-correction surgery for primary degenerative sagittal imbalance: a meta-analysis. J Neurosurg Spine. 2017;27:540–551. DOI: 10.3171/2017.3.SPINE161134.
9. Климов В.С., Василенко И.И., Евсюков А.В., Халепа Р.В., Амелина Е.В., Рябых С.О., Рзаев Д.А. Применение технологии LLIF у пациентов с дегенеративным сколиозом поясничного отдела позвоночника: анализ ретроспективной когорты и обзор литературы // Гений ортопедии. 2018. Т. 24. № 3. С. 393–403. [Klimov VS, Vasilenko II, Evsyukov AV, Khalepa RV, Amelina EV, Ryabykh SO, Rzaev DA. The use of LLIF technology in adult patients with degenerative scoliosis: retrospective cohort analysis and literature review. Genij Ortopedii. 2018;24(3):393–403]. DOI: 10.18019/1028-4427-2018-24-3-393-403.
10. Le Huec JC, Hasegawa K. Normative values for the spine shape parameters using 3D standing analysis from a database of 268 asymptomatic Caucasian and Japanese subjects. Eur Spine J. 2016;25:3630–3637. DOI: 10.1007/s00586-016-4485-5.
11. Yuksel S, Ayhan S, Nabiyev V, Domingo-Sabat M, Vila-Casademunt A, Obeid I, Perez-Grueso FS, Acaroglu E. Minimum clinically important difference of the health-related quality of life scales in adult spinal deformity calculated by latent class analysis: is it appropriate to use the same values for surgical and nonsurgical patients? Spine J. 2019;19:71–78. DOI: 10.1016/j.spinee.2018.07.005.
12. Pizones J, Moreno-Manzanaro L, Sanchez Perez-Grueso FJ, Vila-Casademunt A, Yilgor C, Obeid I, Alanay A, Kleinstuck F, Acaroglu ER, Pellise F. Restoring the ideal Roussouly sagittal profile in adult scoliosis surgery decreases the risk of mechanical complications. Eur Spine J. 2020;29:54–62. DOI: 10.1007/s00586-019-06176-x.
13. Yilgor C, Sogunmez N, Boissiere L, Yavuz Y, Obeid I, Kleinstuck F, Perez-Grueso FJS, Acaroglu E, Haddad S, Mannion AF, Pellise F, Alanay A. Global Alignment and Proportion (GAP) Score: development and validation of a new method of analyzing spinopelvic alignment to predict mechanical complications after adult spinal deformity surgery. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2017;99:1661–1672. DOI: 10.2106/JBJS.16.01594.
14. Mundis GM Jr, Turner JD, Kabirian N, Pawelek J, Eastlack RK, Uribe J, Klineberg E, Bess S, Ames C, Deviren V, Nguyen S, Lafage V, Akbarnia BA. Anterior column realignment has similar results to pedicle subtraction osteotomy in treating adults with sagittal plane deformity. World Neurosurg. 2017;105:249–256. DOI: 10.1016/j.wneu.2017.05.122.
15. O`Neill KR, Lenke LG, Bridwell KH, Hyun SJ, Neuman B, Dorward I, Koester L. Clinical and radiographic outcomes after 3-column osteotomies with 5-year follow-up. Spine. 2014;39:424–432. DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000000156.
16. Gupta MC, Ferrero E, Mundis G, Smith JS, Shaffrey CI, Schwab F, Kim HJ, Boachie-Adjei O, Lafage V, Bess S, Hostin R, Burton DC, Ames CP, Kebaish K, Klineberg E. Pedicle subtraction osteotomy in the revision versus primary adult spinal deformity patient: is there a difference in correction and complications? Spine. 2015;40:E1169–E1175. DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000001107.
17. Байков Е.С., Пелеганчук А.В., Сангинов А.Д., Леонова О.Н., Крутько А.В. Хирургическое лечение пациентов с сагиттальным дисбалансом дегенеративной этиологии: сравнение двух методик // Вестник травматологии и ортопедии им. Н.Н. Приорова. 2020. Т. 27. № 3. С. 16–26. [Baikov ES, Peleganchuk AV, Sanginov AJ, Leonova ON, Krutko AV. Surgical treatment of patients with sagittal imbalance of degenerative etiology: a comparison of two methods. N.N. Priorov Journal of Traumatology and Orthopedics. 2020;27(3):16–26]. DOI: 10.17816/vto202027316-26.
18. Leveque JC, Yanamadala V, Buchlak QD, Sethi RK. Correction of severe spinopelvic mismatch: decreased blood loss with lateral hyperlordotic interbody grafts as compared with pedicle subtraction osteotomy. Neurosurg Focus. 2017;43:E15. DOI: 10.3171/2017.5.FOCUS17195.
19. Kadam A, Wigner N, Saville P, Arlet V. Overpowering posterior lumbar instrumentation and fusion with hyperlordotic anterior lumbar interbody cages followed by posterior revision: a preliminary feasibility study. J Neurosurg Spine. 2017;27:650–660. DOI: 10.3171/2017.5.SPINE16926.
20. Rao PJ, Phan K, Giang G, Maharaj MM, Phan S, Mobbs RJ. Subsidence following anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF): a prospective study. J Spine Surg. 2017;3:
21. –175. DOI: 10.21037/jss.2017.05.03.
22. Saigal R, Mundis GM Jr, Eastlack R, Uribe JS, Phillips FM, Akbarnia BA. Anterior Column Realignment (ACR) in adult sagittal deformity correction: technique and review of the literature. Spine. 2016;41 Suppl 8:S66–S73. DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000001483.
23. Lui DF, Butler JS, Yu HM, Malhotra K, Selvadurai S, Benton A, Agu O, Molloy S. Neurologic injury in complex adult spinal deformity surgery: Staged Multilevel Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion (MOLIF) using hyperlordotic tantalum cages and posterior fusion versus Pedicle Subtraction Osteotomy (PSO). Spine. 2019;44:E939–949. DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000003034.
24. Murray G, Beckman J, Bach K, Smith DA, Dakwar E, Uribe JS. Complications and neurological deficits following minimally invasive anterior column release for adult spinal deformity: a retrospective study. Eur Spine J. 2015;24 Suppl 3:397–404. DOI: 10.1007/s00586-015-3894-1.
25. Uribe JS, Smith DA, Dakwar E, Baaj AA, Mundis GM, Turner AWL, Cornwall GB, Akbarnia BA. Lordosis restoration after anterior longitudinal ligament release and placement of lateral hyperlordotic interbody cages during the minimally invasive lateral transpsoas approach: a radiographic study in cadavers. J Neurosurg Spine. 2012;17:476–485. DOI: 10.3171/2012.8.SPINE111121.
26. Norton RP, Bianco K, Lafage V, Schwab FJ. Complications and intercenter variability of three-column resection osteotomies for spinal deformity surgery: a retrospective review of 423 patients. Evid Based Spine Care J. 2013;4:157–159. DOI: 10.1055/s-0033-1357364.
27. Tarawneh AM, Venkatesan M, Pasku D, Singh J, Quraishi NA. Impact of pedicle subtraction osteotomy on health-related quality of life (HRQOL) measures in patients undergoing surgery for adult spinal deformity: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Spine J. 2020;29:2953–2959. DOI: 10.1007/s00586-020-06439-y.
28. Schwab FJ, Blondel B, Bess S, Hostin R, Shaffrey CI, Smith JS, Boachie-Adjei O, Burton DC, Akbarnia BA, Mundis GM, Ames CP, Kebaish K, Hart RA, Farcy JP, Lafage V. Radiographical spinopelvic parameters and disability in the setting of adult spinal deformity: a prospective multicenter analysis. Spine. 2013;38:E803–E812. DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e318292b7b9.
Review
For citations:
Baikov E.S., Peleganchuk A.V., Sanginov A.J., Leonova O.N., Krutko A.V. Correction of sagittal imbalance after previous surgical interventions for degenerative lumbar spine disease. Russian Journal of Spine Surgery (Khirurgiya Pozvonochnika). 2022;19(2):47-56. https://doi.org/10.14531/ss2022.2.47-56