Objective: We aimed to develop a predictive model for proximal junctional kyphosis (PJK) severity that considers multiple preoperative variables and modifiable surgical alignment.Summary of Background Data: PJK is a common complication following adult deformity surgery. Current alignment targets account for age and pelvic incidence but not other risk factors.Materials and Methods: This is a single-institution, retrospective cohort study of adult deformity patients with a minimum 2-year follow-up undergoing instrumented fusion between 2009 and 2018. A proportional odds regression model was fit to estimate PJK probability and Hart-International Spine Study Group (ISSG) PJK severity score. Predictors included preoperative Charlson Comorbidity Index, vertebral Hounsfield Units near the upper instrumented vertebrae, pelvic incidence, T1-pelvic angle, and postoperative L1-L4 and L4-S1 lordosis. Predictor effects were assessed using adjusted odds ratios and a nomogram constructed for estimating PJK probability. Bootstrap resampling was used for internal validation.Results: Of 145 patients, 47 (32%) developed PJK. The median PJK severity score was 6 (interquartile range, 4-7.5). After adjusting for predictors, Charlson Comorbidity Index, Hounsfield Units, preoperative T1-pelvic angle, and postoperative L1-L4 and L4-S1 lordosis were significantly associated with PJK severity (P < 0.05). After adjusting for potential overfitting, the model showed acceptable discrimination [C-statistic (area under the curve) = 0.75] and accuracy (Brier score = 0.10). Conclusions:We developed a model to predict PJK probability, adjusted for preoperative alignment, comorbidity burden, vertebral bone density, and modifiable postoperative L1-L4 and L4-S1 lordosis. This approach may help surgeons assess the patient-specific risk of developing PJK and provide a framework for future predictive models assessing PJK risk after adult deformity surgery.
Introduction: Surgical management of degenerative lumbar spine disorders is effective at improving patient pain, disability, and quality of life; however, obtaining a durable posterolateral fusion after decompression remains a challenge. Interbody fusion technologies are viable means of improving fusion rates in the lumbar spine, specifically various graft materials including autograft, structural allograft, titanium, and polyether ether ketone. This study assesses the effectiveness of Tritanium posterolateral cage in the treatment of degenerative disk disease.Methods: Nearest-neighbor 1:1 matched control transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion with PEEK vs. Tritanium posterior lumbar (PL) cage interbody fusion patients were identified using propensity scoring from patients that underwent elective surgery for degenerative disk diseases. Line graphs were generated to compare the trajectories of improvement in patient-reported outcomes (PROs) from baseline to 3 and 12 months postoperatively. The nominal data were compared via the χ 2 test, while the continuous data were compared via Student's t-test.Results: The two groups had no difference regarding either the 3-or 12-month Euro-Qol-5D (EQ-5D), numeric rating scale (NRS) leg pain, and NRS back pain; however, the Tritanium interbody cage group had better Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores compared to the control group of the PEEK interbody cage at both 3 and 12 months (p=0.013 and 0.048).Conclusions: Our results indicate the Tritanium cage is an effective alternative to the previously used PEEK cage in terms of PROs, surgical safety, and radiological parameters of surgical success. The Tritanium cohort showed better ODI scores, higher fusion rates, lower subsidence, and lower indirect costs associated with surgical management, when compared to the propensity-matched PEEK cohort.
BACKGROUND: Transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) and posterolateral fusion (PLF) alone are two operations performed to treat degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis. To date, it is unclear which operation leads to better outcomes. OBJECTIVE: To compare TLIF vs PLF alone regarding long-term reoperation rates, complications, and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in patients with degenerative grade 1 spondylolisthesis. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study using prospectively collected data between October 2010 and May 2021 was undertaken. Inclusion criteria were patients aged 18 years or older with grade 1 degenerative spondylolisthesis undergoing elective, single-level, open posterior lumbar decompression and instrumented fusion with ≥1-year follow-up. The primary exposure was presence of TLIF vs PLF without interbody fusion. The primary outcome was reoperation. Secondary outcomes included complications, readmission, discharge disposition, return to work, and PROMs at 3 and 12 months postoperatively, including Numeric Rating Scale-Back/Leg and Oswestry Disability Index. Minimum clinically important difference of PROMs was set at 30% improvement from baseline. RESULTS: Of 546 patients, 373 (68.3%) underwent TLIF and 173 underwent (31.7%) PLF. Median follow-up was 6.1 years (IQR = 3.6-9.0), with 339 (62.1%) >5-year follow-up. Multivariable logistic regression showed that patients undergoing TLIF had a lower odds of reoperation compared with PLF alone (odds ratio = 0.23, 95% CI = 0.54-0.99, P = .048). Among patients with >5-year follow-up, the same trend was seen (odds ratio = 0.15, 95% CI = 0.03-0.95, P = .045). No differences were observed in 90-day complications (P = .487) and readmission rates (P = .230) or minimum clinically important difference PROMs. CONCLUSION: In a retrospective cohort study from a prospectively maintained registry, patients with grade 1 degenerative spondylolisthesis undergoing TLIF had significantly lower long-term reoperation rates than those undergoing PLF.
were responsible for the acquisition of data. Jeffrey Chen and Hani Chanbour were responsible for the analysis. Anthony Steinle, Wilson Vaughan, and Andrew Croft were responsible for the acquisition and interpretation of data for the submitted work.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.