European Spine Journal

, Volume 21, Issue 4, pp 698–704 | Cite as

Sagittal spino-pelvic alignment failures following three column thoracic osteotomy for adult spinal deformity

  • Virginie Lafage
  • Justin S. Smith
  • Shay Bess
  • Frank J. Schwab
  • Christopher P. Ames
  • Eric Klineberg
  • Vincent Arlet
  • Richard Hostin
  • Douglas C. Burton
  • Christopher I. Shaffrey
  • The International Spine Study Group
Original Article

Abstract

Purpose

Three column thoracic osteotomy (TCTO) is effective to correct rigid thoracic deformities, however, reasons for residual postoperative spinal deformity are poorly defined. Our objective was to evaluate risk factors for poor spino-pelvic alignment (SPA) following TCTO for adult spinal deformity (ASD).

Methods

Multicenter, retrospective radiographic analysis of ASD patients treated with TCTO. Radiographic measures included: correction at the osteotomy site, thoracic kyphosis (TK), lumbar lordosis (LL), sagittal vertical axis (SVA), pelvic tilt (PT), and pelvic incidence (PI). Final SVA and PT were assessed to determine if ideal SPA (SVA < 4 cm, PT < 25°) was achieved. Differences between the ideal (IDEAL) and failed (FAIL) SPA groups were evaluated.

Results

A total of 41 consecutive ASD patients treated with TCTO were evaluated. TCTO significantly decreased TK, maximum coronal Cobb angle, SVA and PT (P < 0.05). Ideal SPA was achieved in 32 (78%) and failed in 9 (22%) patients. The IDEAL and FAIL groups had similar total fusion levels and similar focal, SVA and PT correction (P > 0.05). FAIL group had larger pre- and post-operative SVA, PT and PI and a smaller LL than IDEAL (P < 0.05).

Conclusions

Poor SPA occurred in 22% of TCTO patients despite similar operative procedures and deformity correction as patients in the IDEAL group. Greater pre-operative PT and SVA predicted failed post-operative SPA. Alternative or additional correction procedures should be considered when planning TCTO for patients with large sagittal global malalignment, otherwise patients are at risk for suboptimal correction and poor outcomes.

Keywords

Spinopelvic alignment Sagittal vertical axis Osteotomy Pedicle subtraction osteotomy Thoracic Vertebral column resection 

Notes

Acknowledgments

Study group support provided by Depuy Spine.

Conflict of interest

None.

References

  1. 1.
    Bridwell KH, Lewis SJ, Lenke LG, Baldus C, Blanke K (2003) Pedicle subtraction osteotomy for the treatment of fixed sagittal imbalance. J Bone Joint Surg Am 85-A:454–463PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Glassman SD, Berven S, Bridwell K, Horton W, Dimar JR (2005) Correlation of radiographic parameters and clinical symptoms in adult scoliosis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 30:682–688CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Glassman SD, Bridwell K, Dimar JR, Horton W, Berven S, Schwab F (2005) The impact of positive sagittal balance in adult spinal deformity. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 30:2024–2029CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kim YJ, Bridwell KH, Lenke LG, Cheh G, Baldus C (2007) Results of lumbar pedicle subtraction osteotomies for fixed sagittal imbalance: a minimum 5-year follow-up study. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 32:2189–2197CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Lafage V, Schwab F, Patel A, Hawkinson N, Farcy JP (2009) Pelvic tilt and truncal inclination: two key radiographic parameters in the setting of adults with spinal deformity. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 34:E599–E606CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Lafage V, Schwab F, Skalli W, Hawkinson N, Gagey PM, Ondra S, Farcy JP (2008) Standing balance and sagittal plane spinal deformity: analysis of spinopelvic and gravity line parameters. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 33:1572–1578CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Schwab F, Lafage V, Boyce R, Skalli W, Farcy JP (2006) Gravity line analysis in adult volunteers: age-related correlation with spinal parameters, pelvic parameters, and foot position. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 31:E959–E967CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Smith JS, Fu KM, Urban P, Shaffrey CI (2008) Neurological symptoms and deficits in adults with scoliosis who present to a surgical clinic: incidence and association with the choice of operative versus nonoperative management. J Neurosurg Spine 9:326–331PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Schwab F, Lafage V, Patel A, Farcy JP (2009) Sagittal plane considerations and the pelvis in the adult patient. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 34:1828–1833CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Legaye J, Duval-Beaupere G (2005) Sagittal plane alignment of the spine and gravity: a radiological and clinical evaluation. Acta Orthop Belg 71:213–220PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Boulay C, Tardieu C, Hecquet J, Benaim C, Mouilleseaux B, Marty C, Prat-Pradal D, Legaye J, Duval-Beaupere G, Pelissier J (2006) Sagittal alignment of spine and pelvis regulated by pelvic incidence: standard values and prediction of lordosis. Eur Spine J 15:415–422PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Rose PS, Bridwell KH, Lenke LG, Cronen GA, Mulconrey DS, Buchowski JM, Kim YJ (2009) Role of pelvic incidence, thoracic kyphosis, and patient factors on sagittal plane correction following pedicle subtraction osteotomy. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 34:785–791CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Gottfried ON, Daubs MD, Patel AA, Dailey AT, Brodke DS (2009) Spinopelvic parameters in postfusion flatback deformity patients. Spine J 9:639–647PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    O’Shaughnessy BA, Kuklo TR, Hsieh PC, Yang BP, Koski TR, Ondra SL (2009) Thoracic pedicle subtraction osteotomy for fixed sagittal spinal deformity. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 34:2893–2899CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Yang BP, Ondra SL, Chen LA, Jung HS, Koski TR, Salehi SA (2006) Clinical and radiographic outcomes of thoracic and lumbar pedicle subtraction osteotomy for fixed sagittal imbalance. J Neurosurg Spine 5:9–17PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Mummaneni PV, Dhall SS, Ondra SL, Mummaneni VP, Berven S (2008) Pedicle subtraction osteotomy. Neurosurgery 63:171–176PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Bridwell KH (2006) Decision making regarding Smith-Petersen vs. pedicle subtraction osteotomy vs. vertebral column resection for spinal deformity. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 31:S171–S178CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    van Loon PJ, van Stralen G, van Loon CJ, van Susante JL (2006) A pedicle subtraction osteotomy as an adjunctive tool in the surgical treatment of a rigid thoracolumbar hyperkyphosis; a preliminary report. Spine J 6:195–200PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Ikenaga M, Shikata J, Takemoto M, Tanaka C (2007) Clinical outcomes and complications after pedicle subtraction osteotomy for correction of thoracolumbar kyphosis. J Neurosurg Spine 6:330–336PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Horton WC, Brown CW, Bridwell KH, Glassman SD, Suk SI, Cha CW (2005) Is there an optimal patient stance for obtaining a lateral 36” radiograph? A critical comparison of three techniques. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 30:427–433CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Marks MC, Stanford CF, Mahar AT, Newton PO (2003) Standing lateral radiographic positioning does not represent customary standing balance. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 28:1176–1182Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    El Fegoun AB, Schwab F, Gamez L, Champain N, Skalli W, Farcy JP (2005) Center of gravity and radiographic posture analysis: a preliminary review of adult volunteers and adult patients affected by scoliosis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 30:1535–1540CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Rillardon L, Levassor N, Guigui P, Wodecki P, Cardinne L, Templier A, Skalli W (2003) Validation of a tool to measure pelvic and spinal parameters of sagittal balance. Rev Chir Orthop Reparatrice Appar Mot 89:218–227PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Schwab F, Patel A, Ungar B, Farcy JP, Lafage V (2010) Adult spinal deformity-postoperative standing imbalance: how much can you tolerate? An overview of key parameters in assessing alignment and planning corrective surgery. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 35:2224–2231CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Lafage V, Schwab F, Vira S, Patel A, Ungar B, Farcy JP (2011) Spino-pelvic parameters after surgery can be predicted: a preliminary formula and validation of standing alignment. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 36(13):1037–1045Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Virginie Lafage
    • 1
  • Justin S. Smith
    • 2
  • Shay Bess
    • 3
  • Frank J. Schwab
    • 1
  • Christopher P. Ames
    • 4
  • Eric Klineberg
    • 5
  • Vincent Arlet
    • 6
  • Richard Hostin
    • 7
  • Douglas C. Burton
    • 8
  • Christopher I. Shaffrey
    • 2
  • The International Spine Study Group
  1. 1.New York University Hospital for Joint DiseasesNew YorkUSA
  2. 2.Department of Neurological SurgeryUniversity of VirginiaCharlottesvilleUSA
  3. 3.Department of Orthopaedic SurgeryRocky Mountain Hospital for ChildrenDenverUSA
  4. 4.Department of NeurosurgeryUniversity of California San FranciscoSan FranciscoUSA
  5. 5.Department of Orthopaedic SurgeryUniversity of California, DavisSacramentoUSA
  6. 6.Department of Orthopaedic SurgeryUniversity of VirginiaCharlottesvilleUSA
  7. 7.Baylor Scoliosis CenterPlanoUSA
  8. 8.Department of Orthopaedic SurgeryUniversity of Kansas Medical CenterKansas CityUSA

Personalised recommendations