Skip to main content
Log in

Can fusion to S1 maintain favorable surgical outcomes following one-level pedicle subtraction osteotomy in patients with thoracolumbar kyphosis secondary to ankylosing spondylitis?

  • Original Article
  • Published:
European Spine Journal Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

To compare the surgical outcomes between ankylosing spondylitis (AS)-related thoracolumbar kyphosis patients with the lowest instrumented vertebra (LIV) at S1 or above following one-level pedicle subtraction osteotomy (PSO).

Methods

One hundred and two AS patients undergoing one-level PSO with a minimum of 2-year follow-up were included. Twenty-two patients were in group S1 (LIV at S1), and eighty were in group non-S1 (LIV above S1). Radiographic parameters including lumbar lordosis (LL), sacral slope (SS), pelvic incidence (PI), and sagittal vertical axis (SVA) were measured. Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and visual analog scale (VAS) were applied for clinical assessment.

Results

In both S1 and non-S1 groups, the radiographic parameters and clinical outcomes were significantly improved after surgery (P  < 0.05). Patients undergoing distal fusion to S1 had significantly larger preoperative PI–LL mismatch, SVA, and smaller preoperative LL and SS compared to those in group non-S1 (P  < 0.05). No significant difference was found between the two groups regarding preoperative and final follow-up ODI and VAS (P  > 0.05), as well as the improvement in ODI and VAS (P  > 0.05). The incidence of overall complications and each type of complication including the implant failure was similar between group S1 and non-S1 (P  > 0.05).

Conclusion

Selecting S1 as the LIV without pelvic fixation following one-level PSO in thoracolumbar kyphosis caused by AS could achieve satisfactory surgical outcomes and might not increase the complications. Patients with relatively severe sagittal imbalance, loss of LL, PI–LL mismatch, and small SS might be the potential candidates for distal fusion to S1 following one-level PSO.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Park JS, Kim YH, Yang JH et al (2019) Psychological changes and employment outcomes after kyphosis correction in patients with ankylosing spondylitis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 44(14):996–1002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Qian BP, Huang JC, Qiu Y et al (2018) Complications of spinal osteotomy for thoracolumbar kyphosis secondary to ankylosing spondylitis in 342 patients: incidence and risk factors. J Neurosurg Spine 30(1):91–98

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Park YS, Kim HS, Baek SW (2014) Spinal osteotomy in ankylosing spondylitis: radiological, clinical, and psychological results. Spine J 14(9):1921–1927

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Park JS, Kim J, Joo IH et al (2018) Analysis of risk factors for sagittal translation after pedicle subtraction osteotomy in patients with ankylosing spondylitis. Spine J 18(8):1356–1362

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Kim KT, Jo DJ, Lee SH et al (2012) Does it need to perform anterior column support after Smith-Petersen osteotomy for ankylosing spondylitis? Eur Spine J 21(5):985–991

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Hua WB, Zhang YK, Gao Y et al (2017) Analysis of sagittal parameters in patients undergoing one- or two-level closing wedge osteotomy for correcting thoracolumbar kyphosis secondary to ankylosing spondylitis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 42(14):E848–E854

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Qian BP, Wang XH, Qiu Y et al (2012) The influence of closing-opening wedge osteotomy on sagittal balance in thoracolumbar kyphosis secondary to ankylosing spondylitis: a comparison with closing wedge osteotomy. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 37(16):1415–1423

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Debarge R, Demey G, Roussouly P (2010) Radiological analysis of ankylosing spondylitis patients with severe kyphosis before and after pedicle subtraction osteotomy. Eur Spine J 19(1):65–70

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Kim KT, Suk KS, Cho YJ et al (2002) Clinical outcome results of pedicle subtraction osteotomy in ankylosing spondylitis with kyphotic deformity. Spine(Phila Pa 1976) 27(6):612–618

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Qiao M, Qian BP, Zhao SZ et al (2018) Clinical and radiographic results after posterior wedge osteotomy for thoracolumbar kyphosis secondary to ankylosing spondylitis: comparison of long and short segment. World Neurosurg 117:e475–e482

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Edwards CC 2nd, Bridwell KH, Patel A et al (2004) Long adult deformity fusions to L5 and the sacrum. A matched cohort analysis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 29(18):1996–2005

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Shen FH, Mason JR, Shimer AL et al (2013) Pelvic fixation for adult scoliosis. Eur Spine J 22(Suppl 2):S265–S275

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Saigal R, Lau D, Wadhwa R et al (2014) Unilateral versus bilateral iliac screws for spinopelvic fixation: are two screws better than one? Neurosurg Focus 36(5):E10

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Jia F, Wang G, Liu X et al (2020) Comparison of long fusion terminating at L5 versus the sacrum in treating adult spinal deformity: a meta-analysis. Eur Spine J 29(1):24–35

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Cho KJ, Suk SI, Park SR et al (2009) Arthrodesis to L5 versus S1 in long instrumentation and fusion for degenerative lumbar scoliosis. Eur Spine J 18(4):531–537

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Eck KR, Bridwell KH, Ungacta FF et al (2001) Complications and results of long adult deformity fusions down to L4, L5, and the sacrum. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 26(9):E182–E192

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Swamy G, Berven SH, Bradford DS (2007) The selection of L5 versus S1 in long fusions for adult idiopathic scoliosis. Neurosurg Clin N Am 18(2):281–288

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Yao Z, Zheng G, Zhang Y et al (2016) Selection of lowest instrumented vertebra for thoracolumbar kyphosis in ankylosing spondylitis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 41(7):591–597

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Qian BP, Jiang J, Qiu Y et al (2013) Radiographical predictors for postoperative sagittal imbalance in patients with thoracolumbar kyphosis secondary to ankylosing spondylitis after lumbar pedicle subtraction osteotomy. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 38(26):E1669–E1675

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. 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 Joint Surg Am 87(2):260–267

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Qian BP, Jiang J, Qiu Y et al (2014) The presence of a negative sacral slope in patients with ankylosing spondylitis with severe thoracolumbar kyphosis. J Bone Joint Surg Am 96(22):e188

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Linhares D, Cacho Rodrigues P, Ribeiro da Silva M et al (2019) Minimum of 10-year follow-up of V-rod technique in lumbar spondylolysis. Eur Spine J 28(7):1743–1749

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Daubs MD, Lenke LG, Cheh G et al (2007) Adult spinal deformity surgery: complications and outcomes in patients over age 60. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 32(20):2238–2244

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Charosky S, Guigui P, Blamoutier A et al (2012) Complications and risk factors of primary adult scoliosis surgery: a multicenter study of 306 patients. Spine(Phila Pa 1976) 37(8):693–700

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Mok JM, Cloyd JM, Bradford DS et al (2009) Reoperation after primary fusion for adult spinal deformity: rate, reason, and timing. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 34(8):832–839

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Weistroffer JK, Perra JH, Lonstein JE et al (2008) Complications in long fusions to the sacrum for adult scoliosis: minimum five-year analysis of fifty patients. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 33(13):1478–1483

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Yasuda T, Hasegawa T, Yamato Y et al (2016) Lumbosacral junctional failures after long spinal fusion for adult spinal deformity-which vertebra is the preferred distal instrumented vertebra? Spine Deform 4(5):378–384

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Murayama H, Liang J, Bennett JM et al (2015) Trajectories of body mass index and their associations with mortality among older Japanese: do they differ from those of western populations? Am J Epidemiol 182(7):597–605

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Donnelly S, Doyle DV, Denton A et al (1994) Bone mineral density and vertebral compression fracture rates in ankylosing spondylitis. Ann Rheum Dis 53(2):117–121

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Bang-ping Qian has received funding from Jiangsu Provincial Medical Talent Program (ZDRCA2016068). Yong Qiu has received funding from the Jiangsu Provincial Key Medical Center (YXZXA2016009). This study was approved by the University Institutional Review Board.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yong Qiu.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Huang, Jc., Diao, Wy., Qian, Bp. et al. Can fusion to S1 maintain favorable surgical outcomes following one-level pedicle subtraction osteotomy in patients with thoracolumbar kyphosis secondary to ankylosing spondylitis?. Eur Spine J 29, 3028–3037 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-020-06538-w

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-020-06538-w

Keywords

Navigation