Spinopelvic Parameters in the Elderly: Does Inadequate Correction Portend Worse Outcomes?

IF 1.2 Q3 SURGERY
Spine Surgery and Related Research Pub Date : 2024-03-11 eCollection Date: 2024-07-27 DOI:10.22603/ssrr.2023-0206
Masanari Takami, Shunji Tsutsui, Keiji Nagata, Hiroshi Iwasaki, Akihito Minamide, Yasutsugu Yukawa, Motohiro Okada, Ryo Taiji, Shizumasa Murata, Takuhei Kozaki, Hiroshi Hashizume, Hiroshi Yamada
{"title":"Spinopelvic Parameters in the Elderly: Does Inadequate Correction Portend Worse Outcomes?","authors":"Masanari Takami, Shunji Tsutsui, Keiji Nagata, Hiroshi Iwasaki, Akihito Minamide, Yasutsugu Yukawa, Motohiro Okada, Ryo Taiji, Shizumasa Murata, Takuhei Kozaki, Hiroshi Hashizume, Hiroshi Yamada","doi":"10.22603/ssrr.2023-0206","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>This study aimed to compare the outcomes of corrective fusion for adult spinal deformity (ASD) in older people using two different sagittal correction goals: the conventional formula of \"pelvic incidence (PI)-lumbar lordosis (LL) mismatch <10°\" and an undercorrection strategy based on the range of 10°≤PI-LL≤20°.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A total of 102 consecutive patients (11 male and 91 female patients; mean age, 72.0 years) aged above 65 years with scoliosis >20° or LL<20° who had undergone long-segment fusion from the lower thoracic spine to the pelvis for ASD and had been followed-up for a minimum of two years at our institution since March 2013 were included in this retrospective study. After excluding patients with PI-LL≤-10° on postoperative standing radiographs, the remaining patients were divided into two groups: 31 patients with 10°≤PI-LL≤20° (U group) and 63 patients with -10°<PI-LL<10° (M group). Radiological and clinical outcomes were compared between the groups.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The incidence of proximal junctional kyphosis and mechanical failure was not significantly different between the groups (p=0.659 and 1.000, respectively). After excluding patients who underwent reoperation due to mechanical failure, there were no differences in the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and each domain of the Visual Analog Scale score, Scoliosis Research Society-22r patient questionnaire (SRS-22r), or the short form 36 health survey questionnaire at the final observation between the U (n=27) and M (n=57) groups. In addition, the non-inferiority and equivalence of the U group to the M group were demonstrated in all domains of the SRS-22r and ODI. Furthermore, the superiority of the U group was demonstrated by the functional domain of SRS-22r.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>For the sagittal correction goal in corrective fusion surgery for ASD in the elderly, strict adherence to \"PI-LL mismatch <10°\" is not necessary and \"PI-LL≤20°\" may be acceptable.</p>","PeriodicalId":22253,"journal":{"name":"Spine Surgery and Related Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11310528/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Spine Surgery and Related Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22603/ssrr.2023-0206","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/7/27 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: This study aimed to compare the outcomes of corrective fusion for adult spinal deformity (ASD) in older people using two different sagittal correction goals: the conventional formula of "pelvic incidence (PI)-lumbar lordosis (LL) mismatch <10°" and an undercorrection strategy based on the range of 10°≤PI-LL≤20°.

Methods: A total of 102 consecutive patients (11 male and 91 female patients; mean age, 72.0 years) aged above 65 years with scoliosis >20° or LL<20° who had undergone long-segment fusion from the lower thoracic spine to the pelvis for ASD and had been followed-up for a minimum of two years at our institution since March 2013 were included in this retrospective study. After excluding patients with PI-LL≤-10° on postoperative standing radiographs, the remaining patients were divided into two groups: 31 patients with 10°≤PI-LL≤20° (U group) and 63 patients with -10°

Results: The incidence of proximal junctional kyphosis and mechanical failure was not significantly different between the groups (p=0.659 and 1.000, respectively). After excluding patients who underwent reoperation due to mechanical failure, there were no differences in the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and each domain of the Visual Analog Scale score, Scoliosis Research Society-22r patient questionnaire (SRS-22r), or the short form 36 health survey questionnaire at the final observation between the U (n=27) and M (n=57) groups. In addition, the non-inferiority and equivalence of the U group to the M group were demonstrated in all domains of the SRS-22r and ODI. Furthermore, the superiority of the U group was demonstrated by the functional domain of SRS-22r.

Conclusions: For the sagittal correction goal in corrective fusion surgery for ASD in the elderly, strict adherence to "PI-LL mismatch <10°" is not necessary and "PI-LL≤20°" may be acceptable.

老年人的脊柱参数:矫正不足是否预示着更糟的结果?
简介:本研究旨在比较采用两种不同矢状面矫正目标(即 "骨盆入径(PI)-腰椎前凸(LL)不匹配 "的传统公式)进行成人脊柱畸形(ASD)矫正融合术的疗效:年龄在 65 岁以上、脊柱侧弯>20°或腰椎前凸不匹配的连续 102 例患者(男性 11 例,女性 91 例;平均年龄 72.0 岁):两组患者近端交界性脊柱侧凸和机械损伤的发生率无明显差异(P=0.659 和 1.000)。在排除因机械性失败而再次手术的患者后,U组(27人)和M组(57人)在最终观察时的Oswestry残疾指数(ODI)和视觉模拟量表的各域评分、脊柱侧凸研究学会-22r患者问卷(SRS-22r)或36项健康调查问卷短表方面均无差异。此外,U 组与 M 组在 SRS-22r 和 ODI 的所有领域均显示出非劣势和等效性。此外,SRS-22r的功能领域也证明了U组的优越性:结论:对于老年 ASD 矫正融合手术的矢状面矫正目标,严格遵守 "PI-LL 不匹配
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
CiteScore
1.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
71
审稿时长
15 weeks
×
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