The application of a new intraoperative assessment method of coronal balance in surgical treatment of scoliosis

Q4 Medicine
Jie Cheng, Tao Xu, Mamat Mardan, Hai-long Guo, J. Sheng, Mamat Polat, Q. Deng, C. Xun, Jian Zhang, W. Liang, Rui Cao
{"title":"The application of a new intraoperative assessment method of coronal balance in surgical treatment of scoliosis","authors":"Jie Cheng, Tao Xu, Mamat Mardan, Hai-long Guo, J. Sheng, Mamat Polat, Q. Deng, C. Xun, Jian Zhang, W. Liang, Rui Cao","doi":"10.3760/CMA.J.ISSN.0253-2352.2019.20.004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective \nTo introduce a new method for assessing coronal balance in surgical treatment of scoliosis, and to explore its effectiveness in preventing postoperative coronal imbalance. \n \n \nMethods \nThe data of forty-six consecutive patients, who underwent posterior surgery for spine deformity correction from January 2016 to December 2016, were retrospectively analyzed. The series included 19 males and 27 females with an average age of 28.24±21.16 years (7-76 years), and with lower instrumented vertebra (LIV) located at the level of L3 or below. Point-line method was used to evaluate coronal balance by determining whether the center of upper instrumented vertebra was located at the measuring rod passing through the centers of symphysis pubis and LIV among all patients during surgery. Preoperative, postoperative 1 week and 3 months Cobb angle, coronal balance distance (CBD), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), and Scoliosis Research Society Questionnaires-22 (SRS-22) were measured and recorded, and statistical analysis was conducted. And then, subgroup analysis was performed according to preoperative coronal imbalance classification to further evaluate the effectiveness of the new method. \n \n \nResults \nAmong 46 patients in this study, the prevalence of preoperative coronal imbalance was 47.82% (22/46). Of them, ten patients were type B coronal imbalance and eleven patients were type C coronal imbalance. The prevalence of coronal imbalance at one week after operation was 17.39% (8/46), and the prevalence of coronal imbalance at final follow-up was 10.87% (5/46). The results showed that the mean main Cobb angle was 57.24°±26.51° and 14.71°±10.17° at pre-operation and immediate post-operation, respectively. The difference was statistically significant compared to preoperative value (t=13.211, P=0.000), and the average improvement rate was 73.53%±1.88%. Preoperative coronal balance distance CBD ranged from 2.76 mm to 66.73 mm, with an average of 22.54±13.97 mm; the mean CBD was 16.00±14.85 mm at immediate post-operation. The difference was statistically significant (t=3.665, P=0.001), with an average correction rate of 25.58%±52.39%. Our clinical outcome analysis showed that among 46 patients, the preoperative VAS was 8.11±0.89, and the final follow-up VAS was 4.15±0.79. There was a significant difference between pre-operation and the last follow-up (t=21.529, P=0.000). The preoperative ODI score was 49.76±5.84, and the final follow-up ODI score was 25.74±3.92. The difference was statistically significant (t=44.434, P=0.000). The preoperative SRS-22 was 10.57±2.13, and the final follow-up SRS-22 was 21.89±2.35. Compared to pre-operation, the difference was statistically significant (t=24.023, P=0.000). The subgroup analysis showed that in patients with type B coronal imbalance, the mean Cobb angle correction rate was 70.34%±6.02% at immediate post-operation, and there was a significant difference compared to pre-operation (t=5.437, P=0.000); the average CBD correction rate was 37.45%±29.03%, and significant difference was found (t=2.607, P=0.028). In type C patients, the average Cobb angle and CBD correction rate at immediate post-operation was 72.92%±3.67% and 44.79%±5.63%, respectively, and significant difference was found (t=7.319, P=0.000; t=7.545, P=0.000). \n \n \nConclusion \nPoint-line method was a simple and effective technique for intraoperative assessment of coronal balance, which could assist surgeons to objectively evaluate the result of restoration of the coronal alignment. The use of point-line method is contributed to improve clinical outcomes of spinal deformity correction surgery, and to prevent the occurrence of postoperative coronal imbalance. \n \n \nKey words: \nScoliosis; Intervertebral disc degeneration; Spinal fusion; Treatment outcome","PeriodicalId":36405,"journal":{"name":"中华骨科杂志","volume":"39 1","pages":"1249-1256"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-10-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"中华骨科杂志","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3760/CMA.J.ISSN.0253-2352.2019.20.004","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective To introduce a new method for assessing coronal balance in surgical treatment of scoliosis, and to explore its effectiveness in preventing postoperative coronal imbalance. Methods The data of forty-six consecutive patients, who underwent posterior surgery for spine deformity correction from January 2016 to December 2016, were retrospectively analyzed. The series included 19 males and 27 females with an average age of 28.24±21.16 years (7-76 years), and with lower instrumented vertebra (LIV) located at the level of L3 or below. Point-line method was used to evaluate coronal balance by determining whether the center of upper instrumented vertebra was located at the measuring rod passing through the centers of symphysis pubis and LIV among all patients during surgery. Preoperative, postoperative 1 week and 3 months Cobb angle, coronal balance distance (CBD), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), and Scoliosis Research Society Questionnaires-22 (SRS-22) were measured and recorded, and statistical analysis was conducted. And then, subgroup analysis was performed according to preoperative coronal imbalance classification to further evaluate the effectiveness of the new method. Results Among 46 patients in this study, the prevalence of preoperative coronal imbalance was 47.82% (22/46). Of them, ten patients were type B coronal imbalance and eleven patients were type C coronal imbalance. The prevalence of coronal imbalance at one week after operation was 17.39% (8/46), and the prevalence of coronal imbalance at final follow-up was 10.87% (5/46). The results showed that the mean main Cobb angle was 57.24°±26.51° and 14.71°±10.17° at pre-operation and immediate post-operation, respectively. The difference was statistically significant compared to preoperative value (t=13.211, P=0.000), and the average improvement rate was 73.53%±1.88%. Preoperative coronal balance distance CBD ranged from 2.76 mm to 66.73 mm, with an average of 22.54±13.97 mm; the mean CBD was 16.00±14.85 mm at immediate post-operation. The difference was statistically significant (t=3.665, P=0.001), with an average correction rate of 25.58%±52.39%. Our clinical outcome analysis showed that among 46 patients, the preoperative VAS was 8.11±0.89, and the final follow-up VAS was 4.15±0.79. There was a significant difference between pre-operation and the last follow-up (t=21.529, P=0.000). The preoperative ODI score was 49.76±5.84, and the final follow-up ODI score was 25.74±3.92. The difference was statistically significant (t=44.434, P=0.000). The preoperative SRS-22 was 10.57±2.13, and the final follow-up SRS-22 was 21.89±2.35. Compared to pre-operation, the difference was statistically significant (t=24.023, P=0.000). The subgroup analysis showed that in patients with type B coronal imbalance, the mean Cobb angle correction rate was 70.34%±6.02% at immediate post-operation, and there was a significant difference compared to pre-operation (t=5.437, P=0.000); the average CBD correction rate was 37.45%±29.03%, and significant difference was found (t=2.607, P=0.028). In type C patients, the average Cobb angle and CBD correction rate at immediate post-operation was 72.92%±3.67% and 44.79%±5.63%, respectively, and significant difference was found (t=7.319, P=0.000; t=7.545, P=0.000). Conclusion Point-line method was a simple and effective technique for intraoperative assessment of coronal balance, which could assist surgeons to objectively evaluate the result of restoration of the coronal alignment. The use of point-line method is contributed to improve clinical outcomes of spinal deformity correction surgery, and to prevent the occurrence of postoperative coronal imbalance. Key words: Scoliosis; Intervertebral disc degeneration; Spinal fusion; Treatment outcome
一种新的术中冠状平衡评估方法在脊柱侧凸手术治疗中的应用
目的介绍一种在脊柱侧弯手术治疗中评估冠状位平衡的新方法,并探讨其在预防术后冠状位平衡方面的有效性。方法回顾性分析2016年1月至2016年12月连续46例接受脊柱畸形矫正术的患者的资料。该系列包括19名男性和27名女性,平均年龄为28.24±21.16岁(7-76岁),下器械椎骨(LIV)位于L3或以下。采用点线法,通过确定手术期间所有患者上器械椎骨的中心是否位于穿过耻骨联合和LIV中心的测量杆上,来评估冠状平衡。测量并记录术前、术后1周和3个月的Cobb角、冠状平衡距离(CBD)、奥斯韦斯特里残疾指数(ODI)、视觉模拟量表(VAS)和脊柱侧弯研究会问卷-22(SRS-22),并进行统计分析。然后,根据术前冠状动脉不平衡分类进行亚组分析,以进一步评估新方法的有效性。结果46例患者术前冠状动脉不平衡发生率为47.82%(22/46)。其中10例为B型冠状动脉不平衡,11例为C型冠状动脉失衡。术后一周冠状动脉失衡的发生率为17.39%(8/46),最终随访时冠状动脉失衡发生率为10.87%(5/46)。结果显示,术前和术后即刻的平均主Cobb角分别为57.24°±26.51°和14.71°±10.17°。与术前相比,差异有统计学意义(t=13.211,P=0.000),平均改善率为73.53%±1.88%。术前冠状平衡距离CBD为2.76mm至66.73mm,平均22.54±13.97mm;术后即刻平均CBD为16.00±14.85mm。差异具有统计学意义(t=3.665,P=0.001),平均纠正率为25.58%±52.39%。我们的临床结果分析显示,46例患者中,术前VAS为8.11±0.89,最终随访VAS为4.15±0.79。术前ODI评分为49.76±5.84,末次随访ODI得分为25.74±3.92。差异有统计学意义(t=44.434,P=0.000)。术前SRS-22为10.57±2.13,最终随访SRS-22是21.89±2.35。亚组分析显示,B型冠状失衡患者术后即刻平均Cobb角矫正率为70.34%±6.02%,与术前相比差异有统计学意义(t=24.023,P=0.000);C型患者术后即刻平均Cobb角和CBD矫正率分别为72.92%±3.67%和44.79%±5.63%,结论点线法是一种简单有效的术中评估冠状位平衡的方法,有助于外科医生客观评价冠状位的恢复效果。点线法的应用有助于提高脊柱畸形矫正手术的临床效果,防止术后冠状位失衡的发生。关键词:脊柱侧弯;椎间盘退变;脊柱融合术;治疗结果
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
中华骨科杂志
中华骨科杂志 Medicine-Surgery
CiteScore
0.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
8153
期刊介绍:
×
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