What factors are associated with a better restoration of pelvic version after adult spinal deformity surgery?

INTRODUCTION: Poor restoration of pelvic version after adult spinal deformity (ASD) surgery is associated with an increased risk of mechanical complications and worse quality of life. We studied the factors linked to the improvement of postoperative pelvic version. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This is a retrospective analysis of a prospective multicenter ASD database. Selection criteria were: operated patients having preoperative severe pelvic retroversion as per GAP score (Relative Pelvic Version-RPV < - 15°); panlumbar fusions to the pelvis; 2-year follow-up. Group A comprised patients with any postoperative improvement of RPV score, and group B had no improvement. Groups were compared regarding baseline characteristics, surgical factors, and postoperative sagittal parameters. Parametric and non-parametric analyses were employed. RESULTS: 177 patients were studied, median age 67 years (61; 72.5), 83.6% female. Groups were homogeneous in baseline demographics, comorbidities, and preoperative sagittal parameters (p > 0.05). The difference in RPV improvement was 11.56º. Group A (137 patients) underwent a higher percentage of ALIF procedures (OR = 6.66; p = 0.049), and posterior osteotomies (OR = 4.96; p < 0.001) especially tricolumnar (OR = 2.31; p = 0.041). It also showed a lower percentage of TLIF procedures (OR = 0.45; p = 0.028), and posterior decompression (OR = 0.44; p = 0.024). Group A displayed better postoperative L4-S1 angle and relative lumbar lordosis (RLL), leading to improved sacral slope (and RPV), and global alignment (RSA). Group A patients had longer instrumentations (11.45 vs 10; p = 0.047) and hospitalization time (13 vs 11; p = 0.045). All postoperative sagittal parameters remained significantly better in group A through follow-up. However, differences between the groups narrowed over time. CONCLUSIONS: ALIF procedures and posterior column osteotomies improved pelvic version postoperatively, and associated better L4-S1 and lumbar lordosis restoration, indirectly improving all other sagittal parameters. However, these improvements seemed to fade during the 2-year follow-up.

Which sagittal plane assessment method is most predictive of complications after adult spinal deformity surgery?

PURPOSE: Different methods of sagittal alignment assessment compete for predicting adverse events after adult spinal deformity (ASD) surgery. We wanted to study which method provides greater benefit. METHODS: Retrospective study of 391 patients operated for ASD, with > 6 instrumented levels, fused to the pelvis, and 2 years of follow-up. Three alignment methods were analyzed 6-week postoperatively: (1) Roussouly mismatch; (2) GAP score/GAP categories; (3) T4-L1-Hip axis. Binary logistic regression generated models that best predict the following adverse events: mechanical complications (MC): in general and isolated (PJK, PJF, rod breakage); reinterventions (in general and after MC); and readmissions. ROC/AUC analysis was also implemented. In a second regression round, we added different variables that were selected on univariate analysis-demographic, surgical, and radiographic-to complete the models. RESULTS: The best predictor parameters in most models were T4-L1PA mismatch and GAP score; we could not prove a predictive ability of the Roussouly mismatch. The T4-L1PA mismatch best predicted general MC, PJK, PJK + PJF, and readmission, while the GAP score best predicted PJF and reinterventions (for MC and for any complication). However, the variance explained by these models was limited (Nagelkerke's R2 = 0.031-0.113), with odds ratios ranging from 1.070 to 1.456. ROC curves plotted an AUC between 0.57 and 0.70. Introducing additional variables (demographic, surgical, and radiographic) improved prediction in all the models (Nagelkerke's R2 = 0.082-0.329) and allowed predicting rod breakage. CONCLUSION: The T4-L1-Hip axis and GAP score show potential in predicting adverse events, surpassing the Roussouly method. Despite partial efficacy in complication anticipation, recognizing postoperative sagittal alignment as a key modifiable risk factor, the crucial need arises to integrate diverse variables, both modifiable and non-modifiable, for enhanced predictive accuracy. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV.

Reliability of a New Digital Tool for Photographic Analysis in Quantifying Body Asymmetry in Scoliosis.

Background: Advancements in non-ionizing methods for quantifying spinal deformities are crucial for assessing and monitoring scoliosis. In this study, we analyzed the observer variability of a newly developed digital tool for quantifying body asymmetry from clinical photographs. Methods: Prospective observational multicenter study. Initially, a digital tool was developed using image analysis software, calculating quantitative measures of body asymmetry. This tool was integrated into an online platform that exports data to a database. The tool calculated 10 parameters, including angles (shoulder height, axilla height, waist height, right and left waistline angles, and their difference) and surfaces of the left and right hemitrunks (shoulders, waists, pelvises, and total). Subsequently, an online training course on the tool was conducted for twelve observers not involved in its development (six research coordinators and six spine surgeons). Finally, 15 standardized back photographs of adolescent idiopathic scoliosis patients were selected from a multicenter image bank, representing various clinical scenarios (different age, gender, curve type, BMI, and pre- and postoperative images). The 12 observers measured the photographs at two different times with a three-week interval. For the second round, the images were randomly mixed. Inter- and intra-observer variabilities of the measurements were analyzed using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs), and reliability was measured by the standard error of measurement (SEM). Group comparisons were made using Student's t-test. Results: The mean inter-observer ICC for the ten measurements was 0.981, the mean intra-observer ICC was 0.937, and SEM was 0.3-1.3°. The parameter with the strongest inter- and intra-observer validity was the difference in waistline angles 0.994 and 0.974, respectively, while the highest variability was found with the waist height angle 0.963 and 0.845, respectively. No test-retest differences (p > 0.05) were observed between researchers (0.948 ± 0.04) and surgeons (0.925 ± 0.05). Conclusion: We developed a new digital tool integrated into an online platform demonstrating excellent reliability and inter- and intra-observer variabilities for quantifying body asymmetry in scoliosis patients from a simple clinical photograph. The method could be used for assessing and monitoring scoliosis and body asymmetry without radiation.

The reunion with my patients: their journey and experience 30 years after their intervention for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis via CD instrumentation.

PURPOSE: Our objective was to collect the experience and current attitude of those patients, now adults, operated on for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) more than 25 years ago with CD instrumentation (CDI). METHODS: Prospective qualitative cross-sectional study with interpretive phenomenological analysis approach of AIS patients operated in a single center with CDI between 1985 and 1995. Patients underwent a semi-structured interview with their original surgeon. Seven agreed themes were open for conversation, and several subthemes emerged related to their experience during their journey in life. Filed notes were recorded and transcribed verbatim. We used the method of content, semantic and pragmatic analysis. RESULTS: We contacted 103 patients, 100 agreed to participate. Mean age was 47.5 ± 3.3, mean follow-up was 30.9 ± 2.7 years. Three fundamental concerns stood out: discomfort with self-image; low back pain with daily activities; and lack of spinal flexibility. 50% were engaged in continuous physical exercise, and only some referred limitations with load-bearing work. Patients commonly described negative memories of the conservative treatment, but positive memories of the surgical process. In general, there was a good adaptation to social life (occupation, social and family relationships). Two-thirds were married, and 65 women had offspring. A frequent concern was the excess of radiographs over the years, and three developed breast cancer. CONCLUSIONS: Factors such as dissatisfaction with self-image, low back pain, and spine stiffness were relevant to patients throughout their journeys. Despite this, the great majority were satisfied with the treatment received, which allowed them to lead an integrated life in society. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II.

Cost Benefit of Implementation of Risk Stratification Models for Adult Spinal Deformity Surgery.

STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: Retrospective cohort study. OBJECTIVE: Assess the extent to which defined risk factors of adverse events are drivers of cost-utility in spinal deformity (ASD) surgery. METHODS: ASD patients with 2-year (2Y) data were included. Tertiles were used to define high degrees of frailty, sagittal deformity, blood loss, and surgical time. Cost was calculated using the Pearl Diver registry and cost-utility at 2Y was compared between cohorts based on the number of risk factors present. Statistically significant differences in cost-utility by number of baseline risk factors were determined using ANOVA, followed by a generalized linear model, adjusting for clinical site and surgeon, to assess the effects of increasing risk score on overall cost-utility. RESULTS: By 2 years, 31% experienced a major complication and 23% underwent reoperation. Patients with ≤2 risk factors had significantly less major complications. Patients with 2 risk factors improved the most from baseline to 2Y in ODI. Average cost increased by $8234 per risk factor (R2 = .981). Cost-per-QALY at 2Y increased by $122,650 per risk factor (R2 = .794). Adjusted generalized linear model demonstrated a significant trend between increasing risk score and increasing cost-utility (r2 = .408, P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: The number of defined patient-specific and surgical risk factors, especially those with greater than two, were associated with increased index surgical costs and diminished cost-utility. Efforts to optimize patient physiology and minimize surgical risk would likely reduce healthcare expenditures and improve the overall cost-utility profile for ASD interventions.Level of evidence: III.

Relationship between pelvic incidence-adjusted relative spinopelvic parameters, global sagittal alignment and lower extremity compensations.

PURPOSE: In response to sagittal malalignment, compensatory spinal and lower extremity mechanisms are recruited. Thoracolumbar realignment surgery has been shown to yield reciprocal changes in these compensations. Thus, whole-body radiographic assessment has come to the fore. This study aimed to evaluate the relationship between spinopelvic parameters and lower extremity compensation angles and to examine their coupled change with deformity correction. METHODS: This was a multicenter retrospective analysis of patients who had ≥ 4 levels posterior fusion, whole-body radiographs, and ≥ 2 years follow-up. Relative Pelvic Version (RPV), Relative Lumbar Lordosis (RLL), Relative Spinopelvic Alignment (RSA), Femoral Obliquity Angle (FOA), Knee Flexion Angle (KFA) and Global Sagittal Axis (GSA) were measured preoperatively and 6 week postoperatively. Kruskal-Wallis tests were performed to assess the relation of relative spinopelvic parameters to global sagittal alignment and lower extremity compensation angles. Spearman's correlations were performed to assess correlations of pre-to-postoperative changes. RESULTS: 193 patients (156F, 37 M) were included. The mean age was 57.2 ± 16.6 years. The mean follow-up duration was 50.6 (24-90) months. On average, 10.3 ± 3.8 levels were fused. Among the cohort, 124 (64.2%) had a sacral or sacroiliac fixation, and 43 (22.3%) had 3-column osteotomies. Preoperative FOA, KFA and GSA significantly differed between RPV, RLL and RSA categories. Significant weak-to-strong correlations were observed between spinopelvic parameters, global sagittal alignment and lower extremity compensation angles (rho range: - 0.351 to 0.767). CONCLUSIONS: PI-adjusted relative spinopelvic parameters significantly correlated with measurements of the lower extremity compensation. Postoperative changes in RPV, RLL and RSA reflected changes in FOA, KFA and GSA. These measurements may serve as a valuable proxy for surgical planning when whole-body imaging is not available.

Sagittal realignment: surgical restoration of the global alignment and proportion score parameters: a subgroup analysis. What are the consequences of failing to realign?

INTRODUCTION: The Global Alignment and Proportion (GAP) score incorporates three domains directly modified with surgery (relative pelvic version-RPV, relative lumbar lordosis-RLL, lumbar distribution index-LDI) and one indirectly restored (relative spinopelvic alignment-RSA). We analyzed our surgical realignment performance and the consequences of domain-specific realignment failure on mechanical complications and PROMs. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From an adult spinal deformity prospective multicenter database, we selected patients: fused to pelvis, upper instrumented vertebra at or above L1, and 2 years of follow-up. Descriptive, univariate and multivariate analyses were employed. RESULTS: The sample included 333 patients. RLL-6w showed the highest success rate (58.3% aligned), but 16.5% of patients were classified in the "Severe hypolordosis" and "Hyperlordosis" subgroups. RPV-6w was the most challenging to realign, with 51.6% moderate or severe retroversion. Regarding RSA-6w, 21.9% had severe positive malalignment. Correct alignment of RPV-6w (p = 0.025) and RSA-6w (p = 0.002) proved to be protective factors against the development of mechanical complications. Severe pelvic retroversion (p = 0.026) and severe positive malalignment (p = 0.007) were risk factors for mechanical complications. RSA-6w "Severe positive malalignment" was associated with less improvement in PROMs: ∆ODI (8.83 vs 17.2; p = 0.011), ∆SRS-22 total (0.54 vs 0.87; p = 0.007), and ∆SF-36PCS (3.47 vs 7.76; p = 0.04); MCID for ODI (37.0 vs 55.5%; p = 0.023), and SRS-22 (40.8 vs 60.1%; p = 0.015); and PASS for ODI (17.6 vs 31.7%; p = 0.047). CONCLUSIONS: RPV was the most underperformed modifiable parameter. Severe pelvic retroversion and severe positive malalignment influenced the occurrence of mechanical complications. Severe positive malalignment affected PROMs improvement.

Revision surgery following long lumbopelvic constructs for adult spinal deformity: prospective experience from two dedicated databases.

PURPOSE: Pan Lumbar Arthodesis (PLA) are often required for Adult Spinal Deformity (ASD) correction, reducing significantly the compensatory capacity in case of postoperative sagittal malalignment. Few papers have investigated outcomes and complications in this vulnerable subset of patients. The objective of this study was to assess revision surgery rate for PLA in ASD, its risk factors and impact on clinical outcomes. METHODS: Retrospective multicenter review of prospective ASD data from 7 hospitals covering Europe and Asia. ASD patients included in two prospective databases having a posterior instrumentation spanning the whole lumbar region with more than 2-years of follow-up were reviewed. Demographic, surgical, radiographic parameters and Health-Related Quality of Life (HRQoL) scores were analyzed. Univariate and multivariate regression models analyzed risk factors for revision surgery as well as surgical outcomes. Patients with Early versus Late and PJK versus Non-PJK mechanical complications were also compared. RESULTS: Out of 1359 ASD patients included in the database 589 (43%) had a PLA and 357 reached 2-years mark. They were analyzed and compared to non-PLA patients. Average age was 67 and 82% were females. 100 Patients (28.1%) needed 114 revision surgeries (75.4% for mechanical failures). Revised patients were more likely to have a nerve system disorder, higher BMI and worst immediate postoperative alignment (as measured by GAP Parameters). These risk factors were also associated with earlier mechanical complications and PJK. Deformity and HRQoL parameters were comparable at baseline. Non-revised patients had significantly better clinical outcomes at 2-years (SRS 22 scores, ODI, Back pain). Multivariate analysis could identify nerve system disorder (OR 4.8; CI 1.8-12.6; p = 0.001), postoperative sagittal alignment (GAP Score) and high BMI (OR 1.07; CI 1.01-1.13; p = 0.004) as independent risk factors for revisions. CONCLUSIONS: Revision surgery due to mechanical failures is relatively common after PLA leading to worse clinical outcomes. Prevention strategies should focus on individualized restoration of sagittal alignment and better weight control to decrease stress on these rigid constructs in non-compliant spines. Nerve system disorders independently increase revision risk in PLA. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE II: Prognosis.

Does the use of postoperative brace help preventing mechanical complications following adult deformity surgery?

PURPOSE: There is scarce information regarding the effectiveness of postoperative braces in decreasing mechanical complications and reinterventions following adult deformity surgery. METHODS: Retrospective matched cohort study from a prospective adult deformity multicenter database. We selected operated patients, fused to the pelvis, > 6 instrumented levels, and minimum 2 year follow-up. Three hundred and eighty patients were separated into two groups (Brace-3 months TLSO-vs No Brace) and then matched controlling for age, gender and frailty. We studied demographic, intraoperative, and postoperative spinopelvic parameters. Both groups were compared regarding complications and reinterventions in the first 2 postoperative years, using univariate and multivariate logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: We finally analyzed 359 matched patients, mean age of 65.3 ± 8.9 years, frailty-index (0.43 ± 0.15), and mostly females (84%). 224 patients wore a postoperative brace (B) and 135 didn't (NoB). They showed no difference in intraoperative variables and postoperative spinopelvic alignment. They differed (P < 0.05) in: Pelvic incidence (B:58° ± 13 vs NoB:54.5° ± 13); BMI (B:25.8 ± 4 vs NoB:27.4 ± 5); upper instrumented vertebra (B:81.7% T8-L1 vs NoB:72.6% T8-L1), and the use of multiple rods (B:47.3% vs NoB:18.5%). Univariate analysis showed a higher rate of mechanical complications and reinterventions when not using a brace. As well as higher NRS-back and leg pain at 6 weeks. However, multivariate analysis selected the use of multiple rods as the only independent factor protecting against mechanical complications (OR: 0.38; CI 95% 0.22-0.64) and reinterventions (OR: 0.41; CI 95% 0.216-0.783). CONCLUSION: After controlling for potential confounders, our study could not identify the protective effect of postoperative braces preventing mechanical complications and reinterventions in the first two postoperative years.

Combined anterior-posterior versus all-posterior approaches for adult spinal deformity correction: a matched control study.

PURPOSE: Anterior approaches are gaining popularity for adult spinal deformity (ASD) surgeries especially with the introduction of hyperlordotic cages and improvement in MIS techniques. Combined Approaches provide powerful segmental sagittal correction potential and increase the surface area available for fusion in ASD surgery, both of which would improve overall. This is the first study directly comparing surgical outcomes between combined anterior-posterior approaches and all-posterior approach in a matched ASD population. METHODS: This is a retrospective matched control cohort analysis with substitution using a multicenter prospectively collected ASD data of patients with > 2 year FU. Matching criteria include: age, American Society of Anesthesiologists Score, Lumbar Cobb angle, sagittal deformity (Global tilt) and ODI. RESULTS: In total, 1024 ASD patients were available for analysis. 29 Combined Approaches patients met inclusion criteria, and only 22 could be matched (1:2 ratio). Preoperative non-matched demographical, clinical, surgical and radiological parameters were comparable between both groups. Combined approaches had longer surgeries (548 mns vs 283) with more blood loss (2850 ml vs 1471) and needed longer ICU stays (74 h vs 27). Despite added morbidity, they had comparable complication rates but with significantly less readmissions (9.1% vs 38.1%) and reoperations (18.2% vs 43.2%) at 2 years. Combined Approaches achieved more individualised and harmonious deformity correction initially. At the 2 years control, Combined Approaches patients reported better outcomes as measured by COMI and SRS scores. This trend was maintained at 3 years. CONCLUSION: Despite an increased initial surgical invasiveness, combined approaches seem to achieve more harmonious correction with superior sagittal deformity control; they need fewer revisions and have improved long-term functional outcomes when compared to all-posterior approaches for ASD deformity correction.

Compensatory mechanisms recruited against proximal junctional kyphosis by patients instrumented from the thoracolumbar junction to the iliac.

PURPOSE: The compensatory mechanisms recruited by un-instrumented patients against sagittal imbalance are well documented. However, there is a lack of information regarding instrumented patients. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of data collected prospectively in a multicenter adult spinal deformity database. We included patients suffering PJK/PJF after (T8-L2) to iliac instrumentation with minimum two-year follow-up. We measured quantitative sagittal spinopelvic and qualitative sagittal distribution parameters in the immediate postoperative period (6w) and at the time of PJK/PJF appearance. We analyzed how these parameters changed comparing these two time points with univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses. RESULTS: A total of 69 patients were included. Two different patterns at PJK/PJF were found: 36 patients activated compensation (defined as an increase in pelvic retroversion (ΔRPV > 5º), and 33 did not (ΔRPV < 5º). The difference in behavior relied mostly on the amount of not surgically restored pelvic rotation at 6w (OR: 0.6; CI95%: 0.4-9.2; P = 0.017). Non-compensators had less rotation reserve (PTx100/PI = 33.9% vs 47.8%;P < 0.001) associated with worse 6w relative pelvic version and lower lumbar arc restoration, worse 6w relative sagittal alignment and GAP-score, compared with compensators (P < 0.001). Compensators' response was based on pelvic retroversion, causing lower lumbar arc decrease, lumbar apex caudal migration, and upper lumbar arc posterior inclination. Despite compensation, a thoracic kyphosis increase in both upper and lower arches gradually evolved into a PJK/PJF. Non-compensators did not react to PJK/PJF, which forced them into kyphosis from the lumbar apex and extending cranially, mainly throughout the upper thoracic arc. CONCLUSIONS: In patients fused from the TL junction to the iliac, those having greater postoperative pelvic rotation reserve showed greater capacity to recruit compensatory mechanisms against PJK/PJF.

An age and sex matched study on the effect of obesity on the functional outcomes and complication rates in patients with adult spinal deformity undergoing primary multi-level thoracolumbar spinal fusion.

Background: The objective of this study was to determine the effect of obesity on the functional outcomes and complication rates of patients with adult spinal deformity (ASD) undergoing multi-level thoracolumbar fusion. Methods: An age and sex matched comparison of functional outcomes [Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) back and leg scores, Core Outcome Measurement Index (COMI) back scores, Scoliosis Research Society 22 (SRS22) satisfaction and total scores, Short Form 36 (SF36) general health scores, Physical Component Score (PCS), Mental Component Score (MCS), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) (including all domains)] at 6 months, 1, 2, 3 and 4 years and the complication rates at final follow-up between obese [body mass index (BMI) >30] and normal BMI (18.5-24.9) patients undergoing more than 3 levels of thoracolumbar fusion with a minimum 2-year follow-up. Patients who had undergone any previous spinal surgery were excluded. Results: Thirty patients were included in each arm of the study. Baseline demographics, including the number of levels fused, were similar between the groups. Estimated blood loss (EBL) was higher in obese patients (1,916 vs. 1,099 mL, P=0.001), but operative time was similar (282 vs. 320 min, P=0.351). The functional outcomes and satisfaction scores were consistently poorer in the obese group at all time-points, but their satisfaction scores were similar. Obese patients had a higher complication rate (OR 3.05, P=0.038) predominantly due to dural tears and nerve root injuries, but a similar reoperation rate. Conclusions: In patients with ASD undergoing multi-level thoracolumbar fusion, obesity results in a higher blood loss, poorer sagittal correction, poorer post-operative functional scores and higher complication rates than patients with a normal BMI. However, obesity does not affect operative times, length of hospital stay or reoperation rates. Furthermore, patients with obesity have similar post-operative satisfaction scores to patients with normal BMIs.

Quality metrics in adult spinal deformity surgery over the last decade: a combined analysis of the largest prospective multicenter data sets.

OBJECTIVE: The reported rate of complications and cost of adult spinal deformity (ASD) surgery, associated with an exponential increase in the number of surgeries, cause alarm among healthcare payers and providers worldwide. The authors conjointly analyzed the largest prospective available ASD data sets to define trends in quality-of-care indicators (complications, reinterventions, and health-related quality of life [HRQOL] outcomes) since 2010. METHODS: This is an observational prospective longitudinal cohort study. Patients underwent surgery between January 2010 and December 2016, with > 2 years of follow-up data. Demographic, surgical, radiological, and HRQOL (i.e., Oswestry Disability Index, SF-36, Scoliosis Research Society-22r) data obtained preoperatively and at 3, 6, 12, and 24 months after surgery were evaluated. Trends and changes in indicators were analyzed using local regression (i.e., locally estimated scatterplot smoothing [LOESS]) and adjusted odds ratio (OR). RESULTS: Of the 2286 patients included in the 2 registries, 1520 underwent surgery between 2010 and 2016. A total of 1151 (75.7%) patients who were treated surgically at 23 centers in 5 countries met inclusion criteria. Patient recruitment increased progressively (2010-2011 vs 2015-2016: OR 1.64, p < 0.01), whereas baseline clinical characteristics (age, American Society of Anesthesiologists class, HRQOL scores, sagittal deformity) did not change. Since 2010 there has been a sustained reduction in major and minor postoperative complications observed at 90 days (major: OR 0.59; minor: OR 0.65; p < 0.01); at 1 year (major: OR 0.52; minor: 0.75; p < 0.01); and at 2 years of follow-up (major: OR 0.4; minor: 0.80; p < 0.01) as well as in the 2-year reintervention rate (OR 0.41, p < 0.01). Simultaneously, there has been a slight improvement in the correction of sagittal deformity (i.e., pelvic incidence-lumbar lordosis mismatch: OR 1.11, p = 0.19) and a greater gain in quality of life (i.e., Oswestry Disability Index 26% vs 40%, p = 0.02; Scoliosis Research Society-22r, self-image domain OR 1.16, p = 0.13), and these are associated with a progressive reduction of surgical aggressiveness (number of fused segments: OR 0.81, p < 0.01; percent pelvic fixation: OR 0.66, p < 0.01; percent 3-column osteotomies: OR 0.63, p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: The best available data show a robust global improvement in quality metrics in ASD surgery over the last decade. Surgical complications and reoperations have been reduced by half, while improvement in disability increased and correction rates were maintained, in patients with similar baseline characteristics.

Obeid-Coronal Malalignment Classification Is Age Related and Independently Associated to Personal Reported Outcome Measurement Scores in the Nonfused Spine.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate Obeid-coronal malalignment (O-CM) modifiers according to age, sagittal alignment, and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), in the mobile spine. METHODS: Retrospective review of a prospective multicenter adult spinal deformity (ASD) database with 1,243 (402 nonoperative, 841 operative) patients with no prior fusion surgery. Patients were included if they were aged over 18 years and were affected by spinal deformity defined by one of: Cobb angle ≥ 20°, pelvic tilt ≥ 25°, sagittal vertical axis ≥ 5 cm, thoracic kyphosis ≥ 60°. Patients were classified according to the O-CM classification and compared to coronally aligned patients. Multivariate analysis was performed on the relationship between PROMs and age, global tilt (GT) and coronal malalignment (CM). RESULTS: Four hundred forty-three patients had CM of more than 2 cm compared to 800 who did not. The distribution of these modifiers was correlated to age. After multivariate analysis, using age and GT as confounding factors, we found that before the age of 50 years, 2A1 patients had worse sex life and greater satisfaction than patients without CM. After 50 years of age, patients with CM (1A1, 1A2) had worse self-image and those with 2A2, 2B had worse self-image, satisfaction, and 36-item Short Form Health Survey physical function. Self-image was the consistent determinant of patients opting for surgery for all ages. CONCLUSION: CM distribution according to O-CM modifiers is age dependent. A clear correlation between the coronal malalignment and PROMs exists when using the O-CM classification and in the mobile spine, this typically affects self-image and satisfaction. Thus, CM classified according to O-CM modifiers is correlated to PROMs and should be considered in ASD.

How to Select the Lower Instrumented Vertebra in Traditional Growing Rods Index Surgery.

BACKGROUND: There are still no consensus criteria on how to select the lower instrumented vertebra (LIV) for traditional growing rods (TGRs) at index surgery. The aim was to evaluate whether the criteria used for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis fusion adapts to early onset scoliosis (EOS). METHODS: Retrospective analysis of prospectively longitudinal collected data in a consecutive cohort of patients with EOS treated with TGR, expanding from index surgery to 2 years after graduation. The LIV was analyzed regarding its relation to the stable vertebra (SV), substantially touched vertebra (STV), and not STV (NSTV). Failure of LIV selection was considered when revision surgery with distal extension was needed during follow up, due to adding on (ΔLIV tilt > 10°). RESULTS: A total of 25 patients met inclusion criteria. Mean age was 8.6 ± 3 (at index surgery), 15.1 ± 1.8 (at graduation), and 17.8 ± 1.6 (at final follow up). The most frequent LIV at index surgery was L3 (13/25); in 13 cases, STV was selected as LIV; in 7, it was NSTV; and in 5, SV on the standard postero-anterior radiographs. During follow up, a significant increase in the mean LIV tilt (P = .049) and distal junctional angle (P = .017) was found. Nine of the 25 patients (36%) developed adding on: 20% (1/5) of those with LIV at SV, 38.5% (5/13) at STV, and 42.8% (3/7) at NSTV. Of those 9 cases of adding on, only four needed distal extension (mean LIV tilt = 17.6°): 2 STV patients (15.4%), and 2 NSTV patients (28.6%). None of the patients with the LIV chosen at SV needed distal extension due to adding on. CONCLUSIONS: The more cranial the selection of the LIV above the SV, the higher the risk of adding on and of revision surgery with distal extension during follow up. Saving motion segments could be justified by choosing STV as LIV because the need for distal extension is not high, and it can be scheduled during lengthening procedures or at graduation surgery. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Choosing the correct LIV in TGR index surgery is crucial to have a secure distal foundation, control and correct the deformity during growth, and save distal segments to allow growth and mobility.

Variation of Minimum Clinically Important Difference by Age, Gender, Baseline Disability, and Change of Direction in Adult Spinal Deformity Population: Is It a Constant Value?

BACKGROUND: The minimum clinically important difference (MCID), an important concept to evaluate the effectiveness of treatments, might not be a single "magical" constant for any given health-related quality of life (HRQoL) scale. Thus, we analyzed the effects of various factors on MCIDs for several HRQoL measures in an adult spinal deformity population. METHODS: Surgical and nonsurgical patients from a multicenter adult spinal deformity database who had completed pretreatment and 1-year follow-up questionnaires (Core Outcome Measures Index [COMI], Oswestry Disability Index [ODI], Medical Outcomes Study 36-item short-form questionnaire, 22-item Scoliosis Research Society Outcomes questionnaire, and an anchor question of "back health"-related change during the previous year) were evaluated. The MCIDs for each HRQoL measure were calculated using an anchor-based method and latent class analysis for the overall population and subpopulations stratified by age, gender, and baseline scores (ODI and COMI) separately for patients with positive versus negative perceptions of change. RESULTS: Patients with a baseline ODI score of <20, 20-40, and >40 had an MCID of 2.24, 11.35, and 26.57, respectively. Similarly, patients with a baseline COMI score of <2.75, 2.8-5.4, and >5.4 had an MCID of 0.59, 1.38, and 3.67 respectively. The overall MCID thresholds for deterioration and improvement were 0.27 and 2.62 for COMI, 2.23 and 14.31 for ODI, and 0.01 and 0.71 for 22-item Scoliosis Research Society Outcomes questionnaire, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The results from the present study have demonstrated that MCIDs change in accordance with the baseline scores and direction of change but not by age or gender. The MCID, in its current state, should be considered a concept rather than a constant.

The growth-friendly surgical treatment of scoliosis in children with osteogenesis imperfecta using distraction-based instrumentation.

PURPOSE: The study was undertaken to determine the feasibility of growth-friendly distraction-based surgery in children with OI. METHODS: Two multi-center databases were queried for children with OI who had undergone GR or VEPTR surgery. Inclusion criteria were a minimum 2-year follow-up and three lengthening procedures following the initial implantation. Details of the surgical techniques, surgical complications, and radiographic measurements of deformity correction, T1-T12 and T1-S1 elongation and growth were recorded. RESULTS: Five patients were identified. There was one patient with type I OI and two patients each with type III and type IV. Four patients had GR constructs and one a VEPTR construct. The initial scoliosis deformity averaged 80° (70°-103°), and the subsequent corrections averaged 32% for initial correction, 48% at last follow-up, and 54% for the two patients that had a final fusion. The T1-T12 and T1-S1 growth averaged 31 mm and 44 mm respectively, and yearly growth averaged 4 mm and 6 mm, respectively. Growth was notably much less in those with more severe disease. There were 13 complications in 4 patients. Nine of the 10 surgical complications were anchor failures which were corrected in 7 planned and 2 un-planned procedures. Significant migration occurred in one patient with severe OI type III. CONCLUSION: The results varied in this heterogeneous population. In general, satisfactory deformity corrections were obtained and maintained, modest growth was obtained, and complications were similar to those reported in other series of growth-friendly surgery. Limited growth and significant anchor migration are to be anticipated in this population. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV.

Comparing health-related quality of life and burden of care between early-onset scoliosis patients treated with magnetically controlled growing rods and traditional growing rods: a multicenter study.

STUDY DESIGN: Multicenter retrospective cohort study. OBJECTIVES: To compare pre-operative and post-operative EOSQ-24 scores in magnetically controlled growing rods (MCGR) and traditional growing rod (TGR) patients. Since the introduction of MCGR, early-onset scoliosis patients have been afforded a reduction in the number of surgeries compared to the TGR technique. However, little is known about (health-related quality of life) and burden of care outcomes between these surgical techniques. METHODS: This is a retrospective cohort study using a multicenter registry on patients with EOS undergoing MCGR or TGR between 2008 and 2017. The EOSQ-24 was administered at preoperative and postoperative 2-year assessments. The EOSQ-24 scores were compared between MCGR and TGR as well as preoperatively and postoperatively within each procedure. RESULTS: 110 patients were analyzed in this study (TGR, N = 32; MCGR, N = 78). There were no significant differences in preoperative age, gender, etiology, main coronal curve or maximum kyphosis between TGR and MCGR groups. Patients with TGR had averaged 3.9 surgical lengthenings and MCGR had averaged 7.7 non-invasive lengthenings by the 2-year follow-up. When changes in preoperative to postoperative scores were compared, MCGR had more improvements in pain, emotion, child satisfaction and parent satisfaction than TGR although there were no statistical significance. When analyzed separately, MCGR cohort had improvement in scores for all four domains and four sub-domains; while, TGR cohort only had improvement in financial burden domain and pulmonary function sub-domain. CONCLUSION: Although there was no statistical significance, the improvement in pain, emotion and satisfaction scores was larger in MCGR than TGR. Since these areas can be influenced more by mental well-being than other sub-domains, the results may prove our hypothesis that compared to TGR, MCGR with reduced number of surgeries have better psychosocial effects. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.

Adult Congenital Spine Deformity: Clinical Features and Motivations for Surgical Treatment.

BACKGROUND: There is scarce information available about adult congenital spine deformity (ACSD) in the literature, especially its impact after the pediatric age. The aim was to define ACSD characteristics and to establish the drivers for surgical intervention. METHODS: Cross-sectional study of data collected in an adult deformity multicenter database. Only ACSD patients were included. Demographic and radiographic data, as well as patient-reported outcome measures, were assessed. Conservatively (C) vs surgically (S) treated patients were compared using Student t test, χ², and Mann-Whitney U test. RESULTS: Fifty-two patients were included. They were young adults (x = 37.7 years), mostly female (71%). Among them, 60% had single hemivertebrae (HV), 35% had multiple HV, and 5% had segmentation defects. Also, 75% had mainly coronal deformity (Cobb 62.5° ± 29.6) and 25% had sagittal deformity.Mean Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) was 29.6% ± 17 and mean Scoliosis Research Society 22-item survey (SRS-22) total score was 3.2 ± 0.8. Of note, mean SRS-22 self-image score was 2.8 ± 0.9 and 36-item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) physical function score was 40.9 ± 11.Thirty patients were treated conservatively (C), whereas 22 patients underwent surgery (S). No differences were found regarding age, type or location of the deformity, comorbidities, or radiographic parameters. Operated patients had worse Core Outcome Measurement Index (COMI) back scores (C: 3.8 ± 2.4 vs S: 6.7 ± 2.4; P = 0.004); worse SRS-22 self-image (C: 3 ± 0.9 vs S: 2.5 ± 0.9; P = 0.047), and SRS-22 total scores (C: 3.4 ± 0.8 vs S: 2.9 ± 0.7; P = 0.01); worse SF-36 physical component summary (C: 43.3 ± 10.8 vs S: 36.7 ± 10.4; P = 0.048); and worse SF-36 physical role, function, and social function. CONCLUSION: Adult congenital deformity patients were mainly female young adults, with formation defects (HV), worried about their image and presenting some degree of functional impairment and pain. These symptoms were the essential drivers for surgery, rather than the radiographic deformity itself. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: One of the few studies describing the characteristics and clinical concerns of patients with congenital spinal deformities. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3.