外科医生在成人畸形手术后实现术前矢状对齐目标的能力如何?

IF 2.6 3区 医学 Q2 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY Global Spine Journal Pub Date : 2024-09-01 Epub Date: 2023-02-23 DOI:10.1177/21925682231161304
Justin S Smith, Elias Elias, Tolga Sursal, Breton Line, Virginie Lafage, Renaud Lafage, Eric Klineberg, Han Jo Kim, Peter Passias, Zeina Nasser, Jeffrey L Gum, Robert Eastlack, Alan Daniels, Gregory Mundis, Richard Hostin, Themistocles S Protopsaltis, Alex Soroceanu, David Kojo Hamilton, Michael P Kelly, Stephen J Lewis, Munish Gupta, Frank J Schwab, Douglas Burton, Christopher P Ames, Lawrence G Lenke, Christopher I Shaffrey, Shay Bess
{"title":"外科医生在成人畸形手术后实现术前矢状对齐目标的能力如何?","authors":"Justin S Smith, Elias Elias, Tolga Sursal, Breton Line, Virginie Lafage, Renaud Lafage, Eric Klineberg, Han Jo Kim, Peter Passias, Zeina Nasser, Jeffrey L Gum, Robert Eastlack, Alan Daniels, Gregory Mundis, Richard Hostin, Themistocles S Protopsaltis, Alex Soroceanu, David Kojo Hamilton, Michael P Kelly, Stephen J Lewis, Munish Gupta, Frank J Schwab, Douglas Burton, Christopher P Ames, Lawrence G Lenke, Christopher I Shaffrey, Shay Bess","doi":"10.1177/21925682231161304","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Study design: </strong>Multicenter, prospective cohort.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Malalignment following adult spine deformity (ASD) surgery can impact outcomes and increase mechanical complications. We assess whether preoperative goals for sagittal alignment following ASD surgery are achieved.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>ASD patients were prospectively enrolled based on 3 criteria: deformity severity (PI-LL ≥25°, TPA ≥30°, SVA ≥15 cm, TCobb≥70° or TLCobb≥50°), procedure complexity (≥12 levels fused, 3-CO or ACR) and/or age (>65 and ≥7 levels fused). The surgeon documented sagittal alignment goals prior to surgery. Goals were compared with achieved alignment on first follow-up standing radiographs.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The 266 enrolled patients had a mean age of 61.0 years (SD = 14.6) and 68% were women. Mean instrumented levels was 13.6 (SD = 3.8), and 23.2% had a 3-CO. Mean (SD) offsets (achieved-goal) were: SVA = -8.5 mm (45.6 mm), PI-LL = -4.6° (14.6°), TK = 7.2° (14.7°), reflecting tendencies to undercorrect SVA and PI-LL and increase TK. Goals were achieved for SVA, PI-LL, and TK in 74.4%, 71.4%, and 68.8% of patients, respectively, and was achieved for all 3 parameters in 37.2% of patients. Three factors were independently associated with achievement of all 3 alignment goals: use of PACs/equivalent for surgical planning (<i>P</i> < .001), lower baseline GCA (<i>P</i> = .009), and surgery not including a 3-CO (<i>P</i> = .037).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Surgeons failed to achieve goal alignment of each sagittal parameter in ∼25-30% of ASD patients. Goal alignment for all 3 parameters was only achieved in 37.2% of patients. Those at greatest risk were patients with more severe deformity. Advancements are needed to enable more consistent translation of preoperative alignment goals to the operating room.</p>","PeriodicalId":12680,"journal":{"name":"Global Spine Journal","volume":" ","pages":"1924-1936"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11418663/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"How Good Are Surgeons at Achieving Their Preoperative Goal Sagittal Alignment Following Adult Deformity Surgery?\",\"authors\":\"Justin S Smith, Elias Elias, Tolga Sursal, Breton Line, Virginie Lafage, Renaud Lafage, Eric Klineberg, Han Jo Kim, Peter Passias, Zeina Nasser, Jeffrey L Gum, Robert Eastlack, Alan Daniels, Gregory Mundis, Richard Hostin, Themistocles S Protopsaltis, Alex Soroceanu, David Kojo Hamilton, Michael P Kelly, Stephen J Lewis, Munish Gupta, Frank J Schwab, Douglas Burton, Christopher P Ames, Lawrence G Lenke, Christopher I Shaffrey, Shay Bess\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/21925682231161304\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Study design: </strong>Multicenter, prospective cohort.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Malalignment following adult spine deformity (ASD) surgery can impact outcomes and increase mechanical complications. We assess whether preoperative goals for sagittal alignment following ASD surgery are achieved.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>ASD patients were prospectively enrolled based on 3 criteria: deformity severity (PI-LL ≥25°, TPA ≥30°, SVA ≥15 cm, TCobb≥70° or TLCobb≥50°), procedure complexity (≥12 levels fused, 3-CO or ACR) and/or age (>65 and ≥7 levels fused). The surgeon documented sagittal alignment goals prior to surgery. Goals were compared with achieved alignment on first follow-up standing radiographs.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The 266 enrolled patients had a mean age of 61.0 years (SD = 14.6) and 68% were women. Mean instrumented levels was 13.6 (SD = 3.8), and 23.2% had a 3-CO. Mean (SD) offsets (achieved-goal) were: SVA = -8.5 mm (45.6 mm), PI-LL = -4.6° (14.6°), TK = 7.2° (14.7°), reflecting tendencies to undercorrect SVA and PI-LL and increase TK. Goals were achieved for SVA, PI-LL, and TK in 74.4%, 71.4%, and 68.8% of patients, respectively, and was achieved for all 3 parameters in 37.2% of patients. Three factors were independently associated with achievement of all 3 alignment goals: use of PACs/equivalent for surgical planning (<i>P</i> < .001), lower baseline GCA (<i>P</i> = .009), and surgery not including a 3-CO (<i>P</i> = .037).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Surgeons failed to achieve goal alignment of each sagittal parameter in ∼25-30% of ASD patients. Goal alignment for all 3 parameters was only achieved in 37.2% of patients. Those at greatest risk were patients with more severe deformity. Advancements are needed to enable more consistent translation of preoperative alignment goals to the operating room.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12680,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Global Spine Journal\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1924-1936\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11418663/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Global Spine Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/21925682231161304\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/2/23 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Global Spine Journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/21925682231161304","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/2/23 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

研究设计多中心、前瞻性队列研究:成人脊柱畸形(ASD)手术后的矢状对齐不良会影响手术效果并增加机械并发症。我们评估了ASD手术后是否能达到术前矢状对齐的目标:ASD患者根据3个标准进行前瞻性入组:畸形严重程度(PI-LL≥25°、TPA≥30°、SVA≥15 cm、TCobb≥70°或TLCobb≥50°)、手术复杂程度(≥12级融合、3-CO或ACR)和/或年龄(>65岁且≥7级融合)。外科医生在术前记录了矢状对齐目标。结果:266名入选患者的平均年龄为61.0岁(SD = 14.6),68%为女性。平均器械水平为 13.6(SD = 3.8),23.2% 有 3-CO。平均(标清)偏移量(达到目标)为SVA = -8.5 mm (45.6 mm),PI-LL = -4.6° (14.6°),TK = 7.2° (14.7°),反映出 SVA 和 PI-LL 矫正不足以及 TK 增加的趋势。分别有 74.4%、71.4% 和 68.8% 的患者实现了 SVA、PI-LL 和 TK 的目标,37.2% 的患者实现了所有 3 个参数的目标。有三个因素与实现所有 3 个对齐目标独立相关:使用 PACs/equivalent 进行手术规划(P < .001)、基线 GCA 较低(P = .009)和手术不包括 3-CO (P = .037):结论:在25%至30%的ASD患者中,外科医生未能实现每个矢状面参数的目标对齐。仅有 37.2% 的患者实现了所有 3 个参数的目标对齐。风险最大的是畸形更严重的患者。需要进一步改进,以便将术前对齐目标更一致地转化到手术室中。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
How Good Are Surgeons at Achieving Their Preoperative Goal Sagittal Alignment Following Adult Deformity Surgery?

Study design: Multicenter, prospective cohort.

Objectives: Malalignment following adult spine deformity (ASD) surgery can impact outcomes and increase mechanical complications. We assess whether preoperative goals for sagittal alignment following ASD surgery are achieved.

Methods: ASD patients were prospectively enrolled based on 3 criteria: deformity severity (PI-LL ≥25°, TPA ≥30°, SVA ≥15 cm, TCobb≥70° or TLCobb≥50°), procedure complexity (≥12 levels fused, 3-CO or ACR) and/or age (>65 and ≥7 levels fused). The surgeon documented sagittal alignment goals prior to surgery. Goals were compared with achieved alignment on first follow-up standing radiographs.

Results: The 266 enrolled patients had a mean age of 61.0 years (SD = 14.6) and 68% were women. Mean instrumented levels was 13.6 (SD = 3.8), and 23.2% had a 3-CO. Mean (SD) offsets (achieved-goal) were: SVA = -8.5 mm (45.6 mm), PI-LL = -4.6° (14.6°), TK = 7.2° (14.7°), reflecting tendencies to undercorrect SVA and PI-LL and increase TK. Goals were achieved for SVA, PI-LL, and TK in 74.4%, 71.4%, and 68.8% of patients, respectively, and was achieved for all 3 parameters in 37.2% of patients. Three factors were independently associated with achievement of all 3 alignment goals: use of PACs/equivalent for surgical planning (P < .001), lower baseline GCA (P = .009), and surgery not including a 3-CO (P = .037).

Conclusions: Surgeons failed to achieve goal alignment of each sagittal parameter in ∼25-30% of ASD patients. Goal alignment for all 3 parameters was only achieved in 37.2% of patients. Those at greatest risk were patients with more severe deformity. Advancements are needed to enable more consistent translation of preoperative alignment goals to the operating room.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Global Spine Journal
Global Spine Journal Medicine-Surgery
CiteScore
6.20
自引率
8.30%
发文量
278
审稿时长
8 weeks
期刊介绍: Global Spine Journal (GSJ) is the official scientific publication of AOSpine. A peer-reviewed, open access journal, devoted to the study and treatment of spinal disorders, including diagnosis, operative and non-operative treatment options, surgical techniques, and emerging research and clinical developments.GSJ is indexed in PubMedCentral, SCOPUS, and Emerging Sources Citation Index (ESCI).
期刊最新文献
Risk Factors for Failure of Non-operative Management in Isolated Unilateral Non-displaced Facet Fractures of the Subaxial Cervical Spine: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Previous Surgical Exposure and the Onset of Degenerative Cervical Myelopathy: A Propensity-Matched Case-Control Analysis Nested Within the UK Biobank Cohort. Outcomes of One Versus Two Level MIS Decompression With Adjacent Level Stenosis. The Safety of Spinal Surgery in Patients over 80 Years of Age: Propensity Score Matching Study. Coin Test: A Complementary Examination for Assessing Upper Extremity Function in Cervical Myelopathy.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1