How Good Are Surgeons at Achieving Their Preoperative Goal Sagittal Alignment Following Adult Deformity Surgery?

IF 2.6 3区 医学 Q2 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Global Spine Journal Pub Date : 2024-09-01 Epub Date: 2023-02-23 DOI:10.1177/21925682231161304
Justin S Smith, Elias Elias, Tolga Sursal, Breton Line, Virginie Lafage, Renaud Lafage, Eric Klineberg, Han Jo Kim, Peter Passias, Zeina Nasser, Jeffrey L Gum, Robert Eastlack, Alan Daniels, Gregory Mundis, Richard Hostin, Themistocles S Protopsaltis, Alex Soroceanu, David Kojo Hamilton, Michael P Kelly, Stephen J Lewis, Munish Gupta, Frank J Schwab, Douglas Burton, Christopher P Ames, Lawrence G Lenke, Christopher I Shaffrey, Shay Bess
{"title":"How Good Are Surgeons at Achieving Their Preoperative Goal Sagittal Alignment Following Adult Deformity Surgery?","authors":"Justin S Smith, Elias Elias, Tolga Sursal, Breton Line, Virginie Lafage, Renaud Lafage, Eric Klineberg, Han Jo Kim, Peter Passias, Zeina Nasser, Jeffrey L Gum, Robert Eastlack, Alan Daniels, Gregory Mundis, Richard Hostin, Themistocles S Protopsaltis, Alex Soroceanu, David Kojo Hamilton, Michael P Kelly, Stephen J Lewis, Munish Gupta, Frank J Schwab, Douglas Burton, Christopher P Ames, Lawrence G Lenke, Christopher I Shaffrey, Shay Bess","doi":"10.1177/21925682231161304","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Study design: </strong>Multicenter, prospective cohort.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Malalignment following adult spine deformity (ASD) surgery can impact outcomes and increase mechanical complications. We assess whether preoperative goals for sagittal alignment following ASD surgery are achieved.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>ASD patients were prospectively enrolled based on 3 criteria: deformity severity (PI-LL ≥25°, TPA ≥30°, SVA ≥15 cm, TCobb≥70° or TLCobb≥50°), procedure complexity (≥12 levels fused, 3-CO or ACR) and/or age (>65 and ≥7 levels fused). The surgeon documented sagittal alignment goals prior to surgery. Goals were compared with achieved alignment on first follow-up standing radiographs.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The 266 enrolled patients had a mean age of 61.0 years (SD = 14.6) and 68% were women. Mean instrumented levels was 13.6 (SD = 3.8), and 23.2% had a 3-CO. Mean (SD) offsets (achieved-goal) were: SVA = -8.5 mm (45.6 mm), PI-LL = -4.6° (14.6°), TK = 7.2° (14.7°), reflecting tendencies to undercorrect SVA and PI-LL and increase TK. Goals were achieved for SVA, PI-LL, and TK in 74.4%, 71.4%, and 68.8% of patients, respectively, and was achieved for all 3 parameters in 37.2% of patients. Three factors were independently associated with achievement of all 3 alignment goals: use of PACs/equivalent for surgical planning (<i>P</i> < .001), lower baseline GCA (<i>P</i> = .009), and surgery not including a 3-CO (<i>P</i> = .037).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Surgeons failed to achieve goal alignment of each sagittal parameter in ∼25-30% of ASD patients. Goal alignment for all 3 parameters was only achieved in 37.2% of patients. Those at greatest risk were patients with more severe deformity. Advancements are needed to enable more consistent translation of preoperative alignment goals to the operating room.</p>","PeriodicalId":12680,"journal":{"name":"Global Spine Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11418663/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Global Spine Journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/21925682231161304","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/2/23 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Study design: Multicenter, prospective cohort.

Objectives: Malalignment following adult spine deformity (ASD) surgery can impact outcomes and increase mechanical complications. We assess whether preoperative goals for sagittal alignment following ASD surgery are achieved.

Methods: ASD patients were prospectively enrolled based on 3 criteria: deformity severity (PI-LL ≥25°, TPA ≥30°, SVA ≥15 cm, TCobb≥70° or TLCobb≥50°), procedure complexity (≥12 levels fused, 3-CO or ACR) and/or age (>65 and ≥7 levels fused). The surgeon documented sagittal alignment goals prior to surgery. Goals were compared with achieved alignment on first follow-up standing radiographs.

Results: The 266 enrolled patients had a mean age of 61.0 years (SD = 14.6) and 68% were women. Mean instrumented levels was 13.6 (SD = 3.8), and 23.2% had a 3-CO. Mean (SD) offsets (achieved-goal) were: SVA = -8.5 mm (45.6 mm), PI-LL = -4.6° (14.6°), TK = 7.2° (14.7°), reflecting tendencies to undercorrect SVA and PI-LL and increase TK. Goals were achieved for SVA, PI-LL, and TK in 74.4%, 71.4%, and 68.8% of patients, respectively, and was achieved for all 3 parameters in 37.2% of patients. Three factors were independently associated with achievement of all 3 alignment goals: use of PACs/equivalent for surgical planning (P < .001), lower baseline GCA (P = .009), and surgery not including a 3-CO (P = .037).

Conclusions: Surgeons failed to achieve goal alignment of each sagittal parameter in ∼25-30% of ASD patients. Goal alignment for all 3 parameters was only achieved in 37.2% of patients. Those at greatest risk were patients with more severe deformity. Advancements are needed to enable more consistent translation of preoperative alignment goals to the operating room.

外科医生在成人畸形手术后实现术前矢状对齐目标的能力如何?
研究设计多中心、前瞻性队列研究:成人脊柱畸形(ASD)手术后的矢状对齐不良会影响手术效果并增加机械并发症。我们评估了ASD手术后是否能达到术前矢状对齐的目标:ASD患者根据3个标准进行前瞻性入组:畸形严重程度(PI-LL≥25°、TPA≥30°、SVA≥15 cm、TCobb≥70°或TLCobb≥50°)、手术复杂程度(≥12级融合、3-CO或ACR)和/或年龄(>65岁且≥7级融合)。外科医生在术前记录了矢状对齐目标。结果:266名入选患者的平均年龄为61.0岁(SD = 14.6),68%为女性。平均器械水平为 13.6(SD = 3.8),23.2% 有 3-CO。平均(标清)偏移量(达到目标)为SVA = -8.5 mm (45.6 mm),PI-LL = -4.6° (14.6°),TK = 7.2° (14.7°),反映出 SVA 和 PI-LL 矫正不足以及 TK 增加的趋势。分别有 74.4%、71.4% 和 68.8% 的患者实现了 SVA、PI-LL 和 TK 的目标,37.2% 的患者实现了所有 3 个参数的目标。有三个因素与实现所有 3 个对齐目标独立相关:使用 PACs/equivalent 进行手术规划(P < .001)、基线 GCA 较低(P = .009)和手术不包括 3-CO (P = .037):结论:在25%至30%的ASD患者中,外科医生未能实现每个矢状面参数的目标对齐。仅有 37.2% 的患者实现了所有 3 个参数的目标对齐。风险最大的是畸形更严重的患者。需要进一步改进,以便将术前对齐目标更一致地转化到手术室中。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Global Spine Journal
Global Spine Journal Medicine-Surgery
CiteScore
6.20
自引率
8.30%
发文量
278
审稿时长
8 weeks
期刊介绍: Global Spine Journal (GSJ) is the official scientific publication of AOSpine. A peer-reviewed, open access journal, devoted to the study and treatment of spinal disorders, including diagnosis, operative and non-operative treatment options, surgical techniques, and emerging research and clinical developments.GSJ is indexed in PubMedCentral, SCOPUS, and Emerging Sources Citation Index (ESCI).
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信