Skip to main content

The impact of lumbar alignment targets on mechanical complications after adult lumbar scoliosis surgery

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this study was to determine the discriminatory ability of age-adjusted alignment offset and the global alignment and proportion (GAP) score parameters to predict postoperative mechanical complications.

Methods

Surgical patients from the Adult Symptomatic Lumbar Scoliosis cohort were reviewed at 2 year follow up. Age-adjusted alignment offsets and GAP parameters were calculated for each patient. A series of nonlinear logistic regression models were fit, and the odds of mechanical complications were calculated. The discriminatory ability of the GAP score, GAP score parameters, and age-adjusted alignment offsets were determined plotting receiver operative characteristic (ROC) with the C statistic (AUC).

Results

A total of 165 patients were included. A total of 49 mechanical complications occurred in 41 patients (21 proximal junctional kyphosis and 28 pseudoarthrosis). The GAP score had no discriminatory ability in this cohort. Relative lumbar lordosis 15 degrees greater than ideal lumbar lordosis was associated with greater mechanical complications. A lumbar distribution index of 90% was associated with fewer mechanical complications compared to a lumbar distribution index of 65%. Age-adjusted offset alignment targets had no discriminatory ability to predict mechanical complications.

Conclusion

Radiographic alignment targets using either age-adjusted alignment target offset or GAP score parameters had minimal ability to predict mechanical complications in isolation. Mechanical complications following adult spinal deformity surgery are complex, and patient factors play a critical role.

Clinical trial registeration This study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (number NCT00854828) in March 2009.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Availability of data and material

Data sharing request should be sent to KHB.

Code availability

Not applicable.

References

  1. Ames CP, Scheer JK, Lafage V, Smith JS, Bess S, Berven SH, Mundis GM, Sethi RK, Deinlein DA, Coe JD, Hey LA, Daubs MD (2016) Adult spinal deformity: epidemiology, health impact, evaluation and management. Spine Deform 4:310–322. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jspd.2015.12.009

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Bess S, Line B, Fu KM, McCarthy I, Lafage V, Schwab F, Shaffrey C, Ames C, Akbarnia B, Jo H, Kelly M, Burton D, Hart R, Klineberg E, Kebaish K, Hostin R, Mundis G, Mummaneni P (1976) Smith JS (2016) the health impact of symptomatic adult spinal deformity: comparison of deformity types to united states population norms and chronic diseases. Spine (Phila Pa) 41(3):224–233. https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0000000000001202

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Ailon T, Smith JS, Shaffrey CI, Lenke LG, Brodke D, Harrop JS, Fehlings M, Ames CP (2015) Degenerative spinal deformity. Neurosurgery 77(Suppl 4):S75-91. https://doi.org/10.1227/neu.0000000000000938

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Glassman SD, Bridwell K, Dimar JR, Horton W, Berven S, Schwab F (2005) The impact of positive sagittal balance in adult spinal deformity. Spine 30(18):2024–2029

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Schwab FJ, Blondel B, Bess S, Hostin R, Shaffrey CI, Smith JS, Boachie-Adjei O, Burton DC, Akbarnia BA, Mundis GM, Ames CP, Kebaish K, Hart RA, Farcy JP, Lafage V (2013) Radiographical spinopelvic parameters and disability in the setting of adult spinal deformity: a prospective multicenter analysis. Spine 38(13):E803-812. https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0b013e318292b7b9

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Yilgor C, Sogunmez N, Boissiere L, Yavuz Y, Obeid I, Kleinstück F, Pérez-Grueso FJS, Acaroglu E, Haddad S, Mannion AF, Pellise F, Alanay A (2017) Global alignment and proportion (GAP) score: development and validation of a new method of analyzing spinopelvic alignment to predict mechanical complications after adult spinal deformity surgery. J Bone Joint Surg Am 99:1661–1672. https://doi.org/10.2106/jbjs.16.01594

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. 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

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Roussouly P, Gollogly S, Berthonnaud E, Dimnet J (2005) Classification of the normal variation in the sagittal alignment of the human lumbar spine and pelvis in the standing position. Spine 30(3):346–353

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Sebaaly A, Grobost P, Mallam L, Roussouly P (2018) Description of the sagittal alignment of the degenerative human spine. Eur spine J: Off Publ Eur Spine Soc Eur Spin Deform Soc Eur Sect Cerv Spine Res Soc 27:489–496. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-017-5404-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Lafage R, Schwab F, Glassman S, Bess S, Harris B, Sheer J, Hart R, Line B, Henry J, Burton D, Kim H, Klineberg E, Ames C, Lafage V (2017) Age-adjusted alignment goals have the potential to reduce PJK. Spine 42(17):1275–1282. https://doi.org/10.1097/brs.0000000000002146

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Kelly MP, Lurie JD, Yanik EL, Shaffrey CI, Baldus CR, Boachie-Adjei O, Buchowski JM, Carreon LY, Crawford CH 3rd, Edwards C 2nd, Errico TJ, Glassman SD, Gupta MC, Lenke LG, Lewis SJ, Kim HJ, Koski T, Parent S, Schwab FJ, Smith JS, Zebala LP, Bridwell KH (2019) Operative versus nonoperative treatment for adult symptomatic lumbar scoliosis. J Bone Joint Surg Am 101:338–352. https://doi.org/10.2106/jbjs.18.00483

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Team R Core (2019) R: A language and environment for statistical computing. In R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Austria

    Google Scholar 

  13. Frank E, Harrell J (2001) Regression modeling strategies: with applications to linear models, logistic regression and survival analysis. Springer International Publishing, New York

    Google Scholar 

  14. Sebaaly A, Gehrchen M, Silvestre C, Kharrat K, Bari TJ, Kreichati G, Rizkallah M, Roussouly P (2020) Mechanical complications in adult spinal deformity and the effect of restoring the spinal shapes according to the Roussouly classification: a multicentric study. Eur spine J: offl Publ Eur Spine Soc, Eur Spin Deform Soc Eur Sec Cerv Spine Res Soc 29:904–913. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-019-06253-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Baum GR, Ha AS, Cerpa M, Zuckerman SL, Lin JD, Menger RP, Osorio JA, Morr S, Leung E, Lehman RA, Sardar Z, Lenke LG (2020) Does the global alignment and proportion score overestimate mechanical complications after adult spinal deformity correction? J Neurosurg Spine 34(1):1–7. https://doi.org/10.3171/2020.6.Spine20538

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Kawabata A, Yoshii T, Sakai K, Hirai T, Yuasa M, Inose H, Utagawa K, Hashimoto J, Matsukura Y, Tomori M, Torigoe I, Kusano K, Otani K, Mizuno K, Satoshi S, Kazuyuki F, Tomizawa S, Arai Y, Shindo S, Okawa A (2020) Identification of predictive factors for mechanical complications after adult spinal deformity surgery: a multi-institutional retrospective study. Spine 45:1185–1192. https://doi.org/10.1097/brs.0000000000003500

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Jackson RP, Kanemura T, Kawakami N, Hales C (2000) Lumbopelvic lordosis and pelvic balance on repeated standing lateral radiographs of adult volunteers and untreated patients with constant low back pain. Spine 25(5):575–586. https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-200003010-00008

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Yilgor C, Sogunmez N, Yavuz Y, Abul K, Boissiere L, Haddad S, Obeid I, Kleinstuck F, Sanchez Perez-Grueso FJ, Acaroglu E, Mannion AF, Pellise F, Alanay A, European Spine Study G (2017) Relative lumbar lordosis and lordosis distribution index: individualized pelvic incidence-based proportional parameters that quantify lumbar lordosis more precisely than the concept of pelvic incidence minus lumbar lordosis. Neurosurg Focus 43:E5. https://doi.org/10.3171/2017.8.FOCUS17498

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Kwan KYH, Lenke LG, Shaffrey CI, Carreon LY, Dahl BT, Fehlings MG, Ames CP, Boachie-Adjei O, Dekutoski MB, Kebaish KM, Lewis SJ, Matsuyama Y, Mehdian H, Qiu Y, Schwab FJ, Cheung KMC (2021) Are higher global alignment and proportion scores associated with increased risks of mechanical complications after adult spinal deformity surgery? An external validation. Clin Orthop Relat Res 479:312–320. https://doi.org/10.1097/corr.0000000000001521

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Ha AS, Hong DY, Coury JR, Cerpa M, Baum G, Sardar Z, Lenke LG (2020) Partial intraoperative global alignment and proportion scores do not reliably predict postoperative mechanical failure in adult spinal deformity surgery. Glob Spine J. https://doi.org/10.1177/2192568220935438

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Bari TJ, Ohrt-Nissen S, Hansen LV, Dahl B, Gehrchen M (2019) Ability of the global alignment and proportion score to predict mechanical failure following adult spinal deformity surgery-validation in 149 patients with two-year follow-up. Spine Deform 7:331–337. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jspd.2018.08.002

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Katsuura Y, Lafage R, Kim HJ, Smith JS, Line B, Shaffrey C, Burton DC, Ames CP, Mundis GM, Jr., Hostin R, Bess S, Klineberg EO, Passias PG, Lafage V, International Spine Study G (2021) Alignment targets curve proportion and mechanical loading: preliminary analysis of an ideal shape toward reducing proximal junctional kyphosis. Glob Spine J. https://doi.org/10.1177/2192568220987188

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Line BG, Bess S, Lafage R, Lafage V, Schwab F, Ames C, Kim HJ, Kelly M, Gupta M, Burton D, Hart R, Klineberg E, Kebaish K, Hostin R, Mundis G, Eastlack R, Shaffrey C, Smith JS, International Spine Study G (2020) Effective prevention of proximal junctional failure in adult spinal deformity surgery requires a combination of surgical implant prophylaxis and avoidance of sagittal alignment overcorrection. Spine 45(4):258–267. https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0000000000003249

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Mendoza-Lattes S, Ries Z, Gao Y, Weinstein SL (2011) Proximal junctional kyphosis in adult reconstructive spine surgery results from incomplete restoration of the lumbar lordosis relative to the magnitude of the thoracic kyphosis. Iowa Orthop J 31:199–206

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  25. Kim YJ, Bridwell KH, Lenke LG, Glattes CR, Rhim S (1976) Cheh G (2008) Proximal junctional kyphosis in adult spinal deformity after segmental posterior spinal instrumentation and fusion: minimum five-year follow-up. Spine (Phila Pa) 33(20):2179–2184. https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0b013e31817c0428

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Lau D, Clark AJ, Scheer JK, Daubs MD, Coe JD, Paonessa KJ, LaGrone MO, Kasten MD, Amaral RA, Trobisch PD, Lee JH, Fabris-Monterumici D, Anand N, Cree AK, Hart RA, Hey LA (1976) Ames CP (2014) Committee SRSASD proximal junctional kyphosis and failure after spinal deformity surgery: a systematic review of the literature as a background to classification development. Spine (Phila Pa) 39(25):2093–2102. https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0000000000000627

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Yagi M, Rahm M, Gaines R, Maziad A, Ross T, Kim HJ, Kebaish K (1976) Boachie-Adjei O (2014) Complex spine study g characterization and surgical outcomes of proximal junctional failure in surgically treated patients with adult spinal deformity. Spine (Phila Pa) 39(10):E607-614. https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0000000000000266

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Glattes RC, Bridwell KH, Lenke LG, Kim YJ, Rinella A (1976) Edwards C (2005) 2nd Proximal junctional kyphosis in adult spinal deformity following long instrumented posterior spinal fusion: incidence outcomes and risk factor analysis. Spine (Phila Pa) 30(14):1643–1649. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.brs.0000169451.76359.49

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Mancino F, Cacciola G, Di Matteo V, Perna A, Proietti L, Greenberg A, Ma M, Sculco PK, Maccauro G, De Martino I (2020) Surgical implications of the hip-spine relationship in total hip arthroplasty. Orthop Rev (Pavia) 12:8656. https://doi.org/10.4081/or.2020.8656

    Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

Funding was from the National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases of the U.S. National Institutes of Health (R01AR055176) and the Scoliosis Research Society.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

Drs. Dial, Hills, and Kelly involved in study conception and design, data analysis and interpretation, manuscript drafting. Drs. Shaffrey, Schwab, Smith, and Bridwell took part in data acquisition and interpretation of results. Drs. Bess, Lazaro, Bruni, Lafage, and Mr. Lafage involved in interpretation of results. All authors reviewed the results and approved the final version of the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Michael P. Kelly.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

Drs. Dial, Hills, Bridwell, Sardi, Lazaro, R Lafage, and Kelly report no conflicts of interest. Dr. Bess reports the following conflicts: royalties: Pioneer Spine; consulting: Allosource, DePuy, EOS, K2M, Medtronic, Misonix; scientific advisory board/other office: North American Spine Society, Scoliosis Research Society; research support (investigator salary, staff/materials): Allosource, Biomet Spine, DePuy, EOS, K2M, Medtronic, NuVasive, OrthoFix. Dr. V Lafage reports the following conflicts: stock ownership: Nemaris; consulting: Globus Medical; speaking and/or teaching arrangements: DePuy, K2M; scientific advisory board/other office: International Spine Study Group, Scoliosis Research Society; research support (investigator salary, staff/materials): Depuy, Medtronic, Nuvasive, Stryker. Dr. Shaffrey reports the following conflicts: royalties: Medtronic, Nuvasive, Zimmer Biomet; stock ownership: Nvasive; consulting: Biomet Spine, Medtronic, Nuvasive, Stryker; speaking and/or teaching arrangements: Medtronic, Nuvasive; board of directors: Spine Deformity; scientific advisory board/other office: AANS, Cervical Spine Research Society, Spine; research support (investigator salary, staff/materials): DePuy, Globus Medical, Medtronic, Neurosurgery RRC. Dr. Smith reports the following conflicts: royalties: Zimmer Biomet; consulting: Nuvasive, K2M, Allosource, Cerapedics; scientific advisory board/other office: Cervical Spine Research Society, Neurosurgery, Operative Neurosurgery. Dr. Schwab reports the following conflicts: grant: DePuy Synthes, SRS; royalties: K2M, MSD; stock ownership: Nemaris; speaking and/or teaching arrangements: Zimmer Biomet, NuVasive, K2M, MSD, Medicrea; board of directors: Nemaris.

Consent to participate

All patients provided informed consent to participate.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Ethics approval

Washington University IRB approval 201102183.

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

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Dial, B.L., Hills, J.M., Smith, J.S. et al. The impact of lumbar alignment targets on mechanical complications after adult lumbar scoliosis surgery. Eur Spine J 31, 1573–1582 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-022-07200-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-022-07200-3

Keywords

  • Adult spinal deformity
  • Spinal alignment
  • Global alignment and proportion
  • Age-adjusted