Neurosurgery · 2018
Primary Drivers of Adult Cervical Deformity: Prevalence, Variations in Presentation, and Effect of Surgical Treatment Strategies on Early Postoperative Alignment.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Passias Peter G, Jalai Cyrus M, Lafage Virginie, Lafage Renaud, Protopsaltis Themistocles, Ramchandran Subaraman, Horn Samantha R, Poorman Gregory W, Gupta Munish, Hart Robert A, Deviren Vedat, Soroceanu Alexandra, Smith Justin S, Schwab Frank, Shaffrey Christopher I, Ames Christopher P, International Spine Study Group (Littleton, Colorado)
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Primary drivers (PDs) of adult cervical deformity (ACD) have not been described in relation to pre- and early postoperative alignment or degree of correction.
OBJECTIVE: To define the PDs of ACD to understand the impact of driver region on global postoperative compensatory mechanisms.
METHODS: Primary cervical deformity driver/vertebral apex level were determined: CS = cervical; CTJ = cervicothoracic junction; TH = thoracic; SP = spinopelvic. Patients were evaluated if surgery included PD apex, based on the lowest instrumented vertebra (LIV): CS: LIV ≤ C7, CTJ: LIV ≤ T3, TH: LIV ≤ T12. Cervical and thoracolumbar alignment was measured preoperatively and 3 mo (3M) postoperatively. PD groups were compared with analysis of variance/Pearson χ2, paired t-tests.
RESULTS: Eighty-four ACD patients met inclusion criteria. Thoracic drivers (n = 26) showed greatest preoperative cervical and global malalignment against other PD: higher thoracic kyphosis, pelvic incidence-lumbar lordosis (PI-LL), T1 slope C2-T3 sagittal vertical axis (SVA), and C0-2 angle (P < .05). Differences in baseline-3M alignment changes were observed between surgical PD groups, in PI-LL, LL, T1 slope minus cervical lordosis (TS-CL), cervical SVA, C2-T3 SVA (P < .05). Main changes were between TH and CS driver groups: TH patients had greater PI-LL (4.47° vs -0.87°, P = .049), TS-CL (-19.12° vs -4.30, P = .050), C2-C7 SVA (-18.12 vs -4.30 mm, P = .007), and C2-T3 SVA (-24.76 vs 8.50 mm, P = .002) baseline-3M correction. CTJ drivers trended toward greater LL correction compared to CS drivers (-6.00° vs 0.88°, P = .050). Patients operated at CS driver level had a difference in the prevalence of 3M TS-CL modifier grades (0 = 35.7%, 1 = 0.0%, 2 = 13.3%, P = .030). There was a significant difference in 3M chin-brow vertical angle modifier grade distribution in TH drivers (0 = 0.0%, 1 = 35.9%, 2 = 14.3%, P = .049).
CONCLUSION: Characterizing ACD patients by PD type reveals differences in pre- and postoperative alignment. Evaluating surgical alignment outcomes based on PD inclusion is important in understanding alignment goals for ACD correction.
OBJECTIVE: To define the PDs of ACD to understand the impact of driver region on global postoperative compensatory mechanisms.
METHODS: Primary cervical deformity driver/vertebral apex level were determined: CS = cervical; CTJ = cervicothoracic junction; TH = thoracic; SP = spinopelvic. Patients were evaluated if surgery included PD apex, based on the lowest instrumented vertebra (LIV): CS: LIV ≤ C7, CTJ: LIV ≤ T3, TH: LIV ≤ T12. Cervical and thoracolumbar alignment was measured preoperatively and 3 mo (3M) postoperatively. PD groups were compared with analysis of variance/Pearson χ2, paired t-tests.
RESULTS: Eighty-four ACD patients met inclusion criteria. Thoracic drivers (n = 26) showed greatest preoperative cervical and global malalignment against other PD: higher thoracic kyphosis, pelvic incidence-lumbar lordosis (PI-LL), T1 slope C2-T3 sagittal vertical axis (SVA), and C0-2 angle (P < .05). Differences in baseline-3M alignment changes were observed between surgical PD groups, in PI-LL, LL, T1 slope minus cervical lordosis (TS-CL), cervical SVA, C2-T3 SVA (P < .05). Main changes were between TH and CS driver groups: TH patients had greater PI-LL (4.47° vs -0.87°, P = .049), TS-CL (-19.12° vs -4.30, P = .050), C2-C7 SVA (-18.12 vs -4.30 mm, P = .007), and C2-T3 SVA (-24.76 vs 8.50 mm, P = .002) baseline-3M correction. CTJ drivers trended toward greater LL correction compared to CS drivers (-6.00° vs 0.88°, P = .050). Patients operated at CS driver level had a difference in the prevalence of 3M TS-CL modifier grades (0 = 35.7%, 1 = 0.0%, 2 = 13.3%, P = .030). There was a significant difference in 3M chin-brow vertical angle modifier grade distribution in TH drivers (0 = 0.0%, 1 = 35.9%, 2 = 14.3%, P = .049).
CONCLUSION: Characterizing ACD patients by PD type reveals differences in pre- and postoperative alignment. Evaluating surgical alignment outcomes based on PD inclusion is important in understanding alignment goals for ACD correction.