Analysis of pelvic compensation for dynamic sagittal imbalance using motion analysis
To analyze pelvic compensation during walking in patients with severe sagittal plane deformity by using motion analysis.
A total of 44 patients with sagittal plane deformity who were scheduled to undergo surgery were included. Motion analysis was performed 3 consecutive times during walking to estimate the anterior pelvic tilt (Ant-PT) angle, trunk kyphosis (TK) angle, and distance of the center of gravity (CoG) from the center of mass (CoM) of the pelvic segment, and hip and knee joint angles during gait. The patients were classified into Ant-PT+/Ant-PT−, TK+/TK−, and CoG+/CoG− groups according to the changes in Ant-PT angle, TK angle, and distance of the CoG from the CoM of the pelvic segment. Increases and decreases in the values of the variables from the first trial to the third trial were indicated with “+” and “−” signs, respectively.
The mean Ant-PT angle, TK angle, and distance of the CoG from the CoM of the pelvic segment increased progressively, and the differences in the values of these variables from the first to the third trials were statistically significant (P = 0.046, P = 0.004, and P = 0.007 for the Ant-PT angle, TK angle, and distance of the CoG from the CoM of pelvic segment, respectively). Among the 44 patients, 27 and 34 were classified into the Ant-PT+ and CoG+ groups, respectively. Older age and higher body mass index (BMI) were significantly associated with the Ant-PT+ group. The CoG+ group demonstrated a significantly higher height and weight than the CoG− group.
Higher BMI, height, and weight are risk factors for progressive worsening of dynamic sagittal imbalance.
KeywordsDynamic sagittal imbalance Motion analysis Pelvic compensation Center of gravity Anterior pelvic tilt angle
This research was supported by Basic Science Research Program through the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) funded by the Ministry of Education, Science and Technology (2016R1A2B3012850) and by Grant Number 14-2018-005 from the SNUBH Research Fund.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
- 2.Le Huec JC, Charosky S, Barrey C, Rigal J, Aunoble S (2011) Sagittal imbalance cascade for simple degenerative spine and consequences: algorithm of decision for appropriate treatment. Eur Spine J Off Publ Eur Spine Soc Eur Spinal Deform Soc Eur Sect Cerv Spine Res Soc 20(Suppl 5):699–703. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-011-1938-8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 6.Lafage R, Schwab F, Challier V, Henry JK, Gum J, Smith J, Hostin R, Shaffrey C, Kim HJ, Ames C, Scheer J, Klineberg E, Bess S, Burton D, Lafage V (2016) Defining spino-pelvic alignment thresholds: should operative goals in adult spinal deformity surgery account for age? Spine 41(1):62–68. https://doi.org/10.1097/brs.0000000000001171 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 8.Marks MC, Stanford CF, Mahar AT, Newton PO (2003) Standing lateral radiographic positioning does not represent customary standing balance. Spine 28(11):1176–1182. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.brs.0000067271.00258.51 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 10.Scheer JK, Smith JS, Clark AJ, Lafage V, Kim HJ, Rolston JD, Eastlack R, Hart RA, Protopsaltis TS, Kelly MP, Kebaish K, Gupta M, Klineberg E, Hostin R, Shaffrey CI, Schwab F, Ames CP (2015) Comprehensive study of back and leg pain improvements after adult spinal deformity surgery: analysis of 421 patients with 2-year follow-up and of the impact of the surgery on treatment satisfaction. J Neurosurg Spine 22(5):540–553. https://doi.org/10.3171/2014.10.spine14475 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 11.Kim HJ, Shen F, Kang KT, Chun HJ, Kim ST, Chang BS, Lee CK, Yeom JS (2019) Failure of pelvic compensation in patients with severe positive sagittal imbalance: comparison between static radiographs and gait analysis of spinopelvic parameters in adult spinal deformity and lumbar stenosis. Spine. https://doi.org/10.1097/brs.0000000000002985 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 15.Cruz-Jentoft AJ, Baeyens JP, Bauer JM, Boirie Y, Cederholm T, Landi F, Martin FC, Michel JP, Rolland Y, Schneider SM, Topinkova E, Vandewoude M, Zamboni M (2010) Sarcopenia: European consensus on definition and diagnosis: report of the European working group on sarcopenia in older people. Age Ageing 39(4):412–423. https://doi.org/10.1093/ageing/afq034 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 20.van Wingerden JP, Vleeming A, Buyruk HM, Raissadat K (2004) Stabilization of the sacroiliac joint in vivo: verification of muscular contribution to force closure of the pelvis. Eur Spine J Off Publ Eur Spine Soc Eur Spinal Deform Soc Eur Sect Cerv Spine Res Soc 13(3):199–205. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-003-0575-2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 22.Jalai CM, Diebo BG, Cruz DL, Poorman GW, Vira S, Buckland AJ, Lafage R, Bess S, Errico TJ, Lafage V, Passias PG (2017) The impact of obesity on compensatory mechanisms in response to progressive sagittal malalignment. Spine J 17(5):681–688. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spinee.2016.11.016 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar