Advertisement

Does kyphotic deformity correlate with functional outcomes in fractures at the thoracolumbar junction treated by 360° instrumented fusion?

  • Ronald SchulzEmail author
  • Robert P. Melcher
  • Miguel Cumsille Garib
  • Hermann Schulz
  • Karen Weissman
  • Jürgen Harms
Original Article

Abstract

Sagittal balance and its relationship with back pain and functional outcomes has become an important factor in the management of thoracolumbar fractures. The kyphosis threshold at the thoracolumbar junction (TLJ) that produces a significant functional impairment remains unclear. Ninety-four patients who were treated surgically for TLJ fractures were evaluated after a follow-up period of 2–10 years. Functional evaluation based on the Oswestry and Hannover Scores (HS) was performed. Additionally, such patients underwent clinical and radiological evaluation. A significant inversely proportional correlation between the HS and the degrees of local kyphosis (“K-Angle”) (p = 0.0172) was found. A significant directly proportional correlation between Oswestry Score and “K-Angle” (p = 0.0142) was found. Significantly poorer scores with both measurement tools (Hannover and Oswestry Scores) were found in patients with a kyphosis higher than 12°.

Keywords

Thoracolumbar fractures Sagittal balance Functional outcomes Kyphosis Functional impairment Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) Hannover Score Cobb’s angle 

Notes

Conflict of interest

The corresponding author developed this study in the frame of a research fellowship supported by an academic institution without relationship with the biomedical or pharmacological industry (Deutscher Akademischer Austauschdienst). No other financial support, direct or indirect, was received by any of the authors.

References

  1. 1.
    Alanay A, Acaroglu E, Yazici M et al (2001) Short-segment pedicle instrumentation of thoracolumbar burst fractures: does transpedicular intracorporeal grafting prevent early failure? Spine 26:213–217PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Knop C, Fabian H, Bastian L et al (2001) Late results of thoracolumbar fractures after posterior instrumentation and transpedicular bone grafting. Spine 26:88–99PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    McCormack T, Karaikovic E, Gaines RW (1994) The load-sharing classification of spine fractures. Spine 19:1741–1744PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    McLain RF, Sparling E, Benson DR (1993) Early failure of short-segment pedicle instrumentation for thoracolumbar fractures. A preliminary report. J Bone Jt Surg (Am) 75-A:162–167Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    McLain R (2004) Functional outcome after surgery for spinal fractures: return to work and activity. Spine 29:470–477PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Alanay A, Yazici M, Acaroglu E et al (2004) Course of nonsurgical management of burst fractures with intact posterior ligamentous complex: an MRI study. Spine 29:2425–2431PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Cantor JB, Lebwohl NH, Garvey T et al (1993) Nonoperative management of stable thoracolumbar burst fractures with early ambulation and bracing. Spine 18:971–976PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Chow GH, Nelson BJ, Gebhard JS et al (1996) Functional outcome of thoracolumbar burst fractures managed with hyperextension casting or bracing and early mobilization. Spine 21:2170–2174PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Gertzbein S (1992) Scoliosis research society: multicenter spine fracture study. Spine 17:528–540PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Tropiano P, Huang R, Louis C et al (2003) Functional and radiographic outcome of thoracolumbar and lumbar burst fractures managed by closed orthopaedic reduction and casting. Spine 28:2459–2465PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Wood K, Butterman G, Mehbod A et al (2003) Operative compared with nonoperative treatment of a thoracolumbar burst fracture without neurological deficit. J Bone Jt Surg (Am) 85-A:773–781Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Knop C, Oeser M, Bastian L et al (2001) Entwicklung und Validierung des VAS-Wirbelsäulenscores. Unfallchirurg 104:488–497PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Fairbank JCT, Pynsent PB (2000) The Oswestry Disability Index. Spine 25:2940–2953PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kuklo T, Polly D, Owens B et al (2001) Measurements of thoracic and lumbar fracture kyphosis: evaluation of intraobserver, interobserver, and technique variability. Spine 26:61–66PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Magerl F, Aebi M, Gertzbein S et al (1994) A comprehensive classification of thoracic and lumbar injuries. Eur Spine J 3:184–201PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Lazennec JY, Ramare S, Arafati N et al (2000) Sagittal alignment in lumbosacral fusion: relations between radiological parameters and pain. Eur Spine J 9:47–55PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Roussouly P, Gollogly S, Berthonnaud E et al (2005) Classification of the normal variation in the sagittal alignment of the human lumbar spine and pelvis in the standing position. Spine 30:346–353PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Vialle R, Levassor N, Rillardon L et al (2005) Radiographic analysis of the sagittal alignment and balance of the spine in asymptomatic subjects. J Bone Jt Surg (Am) 87-A:260–267CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Koller H, Acosta F, Hempfing A et al (2008) Long-term investigation of nonsurgical treatment for thoracolumbar and lumbar burst fractures: an outcome analysis in sight of spinopelvic balance. Eur Spine J 17:1073–1095PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Stolze D, Harms J (1999) Correction of traumatic deformities. Principles and techniques. Der Orthopäde 28:731–745Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Jackson RP, Hales C (2000) Congruent spinopelvic alignment on standing lateral radiographs of adult volunteers. Spine 25:2808–2815PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Jackson RP, Kanemura T, Kawakami N et al (2000) Lumbopelvic lordosis and pelvic balance on repeated standing lateral radiographs of adult volunteers and untreated patients with constant low back pain. Spine 25:575–586PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Barrey C, Jund J, Noseda O et al (2007) Sagittal balance of the pelvis-spine complex and lumbar degenerative diseases. A comparative study about 85 cases. Eur Spine J 16:1459–1467PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Kumar MN, Baklanov A, Chopin D (2001) Correlation between sagittal plane changes and adjacent segment degeneration following lumbar spine fusion. Eur Spine J 10:314–319PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Oda I, Cunningham B, Buckley R et al (1999) Does spinal kyphotic deformity influence the biomechanichal characteristics of the adjacent motion segments? An in vivo animal model. Spine 24:2139–2146PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Glassman SD, Bridwell K, Dimar JR et al (2005) The impact of positive sagittal balance in adult spinal deformity. Spine 30:2024–2029PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Folman Y, Gepstein R (2003) Late outcome of nonoperative management of thoracolumbar vertebral wedge fractures. J Orthop Trauma 17:190–192PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Oner FC, van Gils APG, Faber JAJ et al (2002) Some complications of common treatment schemes of thoracolumbar spine fractures can be predicted with magnetic resonance imaging. Spine 27:629–636PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Mumford J, Weinstein JN, Spratt KF et al (1993) Thoracolumbar burst fractures: the clinical efficacy and outcome of nonoperative management. Spine 18:955–970PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Sanderson PL, Fraser RD, Hall DJ et al (1999) Short segment fixation of thoracolumbar burst fractures without fusion. Eur Spine J 8:495–500PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Siebenga J, Leferink VJ, Segers MJ et al (2006) Treatment of traumatic thoracolumbar spine fractures: a multicenter prospective randomized study of operative versus nonsurgical treatment. Spine 31:2881–2890PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Wood KB, Bohn D, Mehbod A (2005) Anterior versus posterior treatment of stable thoracolumbar burst fractures without neurologic deficit: a prospective, randomized study. J Spinal Disord Tech 18(Suppl):S15–S23PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Korovessis P, Baikousis A, Zacharatos S et al (2006) Combined anterior plus posterior stabilization versus posterior short-segment instrumentation and fusion for mid-lumbar (L2–L4) burst fractures. Spine 31:859–868PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Briem D, Lehmann W, Ruecker AH et al (2004) Factors influencing the quality of life after burst fractures of the thoracolumbar transition. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 124:461–468PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag France 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ronald Schulz
    • 1
    Email author
  • Robert P. Melcher
    • 2
  • Miguel Cumsille Garib
    • 3
  • Hermann Schulz
    • 4
  • Karen Weissman
    • 3
  • Jürgen Harms
    • 2
  1. 1.Hospital Clínico Universidad de ChileSantiago de ChileChile
  2. 2.Klinikum Karlsbad-LangensteinbachKarlsbad-LangensteinbachGermany
  3. 3.Facultad de MedicinaUniversidad de ChileSantiago de ChileChile
  4. 4.Facultad de MedicinaUniversidad de Los AndesSantiago de ChileChile

Personalised recommendations