Impact of an intraoperative coronal spinal alignment measurement technique using a navigational tool for a 3D spinal rod bending system in adult spinal deformity cases

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-9
Author(s):  
Masanari Takami ◽  
Ryo Taiji ◽  
Shunji Tsutsui ◽  
Hiroshi Iwasaki ◽  
Motohiro Okada ◽  
...  

OBJECTIVE In corrective spinal surgery for adult spinal deformity (ASD), the focus has been on achieving optimal spinopelvic alignment. However, the correction of coronal spinal alignment is equally important. The conventional intraoperative measurement methods currently used for coronal alignment are not ideal. Here, the authors have developed a new intraoperative coronal alignment measurement technique using a navigational tool for a 3D spinal rod bending system (CAMNBS). The purpose of this study was to test the feasibility of using the CAMNBS for coronal spinal alignment and to evaluate its usefulness in corrective spinal surgery for ASD. METHODS In this retrospective cohort study, patients with degenerative lumbar kyphoscoliosis, a Cobb angle ≥ 20°, and lumbar lordosis ≤ 20° who had undergone corrective surgery (n = 67) were included. The pelvic teardrops on both sides, the S1 spinous process, the central point of the apex, a point on the 30-mm cranial (or caudal) side of the apex, and the central point of the upper instrumented vertebra (UIV) and C7 vertebra were registered using the CAMNBS. The positional information of all registered points was displayed as 2D figures on a monitor. Deviation of the UIV plumb line from the central sacral vertical line (UIV-CSVL) and deviation of the C7 plumb line from the CSVL (C7-CSVL) were measured using the 2D figures. Nineteen patients evaluated using the CAMNBS (BS group) were compared with 48 patients evaluated using conventional intraoperative radiography (XR group). The UIV-CSVL measured intraoperatively using the CAMNBS was compared with that measured using postoperative radiography. The prevalence of postoperative coronal malalignment (CM) and the absolute value of postoperative C7-CSVL were compared between the groups on radiographs obtained in the standing position within 4 weeks after surgery. Postoperative CM was defined as the absolute value of C7-CSVL ≥ 30 mm. Further, the measurement time and amount of radiation exposure were measured. RESULTS No significant differences in demographic, sagittal, and coronal parameters were observed between the two groups. UIV-CSVL was 2.3 ± 9.5 mm with the CAMNBS and 1.8 ± 16.6 mm with the radiographs, showing no significant difference between the two methods (p = 0.92). The prevalence of CM was 2/19 (10.5%) in the BS group and 18/48 (37.5%) in the XR group, and absolute values of C7-CSVL were 15.2 ± 13.1 mm in the BS group and 25.0 ± 18.0 mm in the XR group, showing statistically significant differences in both comparisons (p = 0.04 and 0.03, respectively). The CAMNBS method required 3.5 ± 0.9 minutes, while the conventional radiograph method required 13.3 ± 1.5 minutes; radiation exposure was 2.1 ± 1.1 mGy in the BS group and 2.9 ± 0.6 mGy in the XR group. Statistically significant differences were demonstrated in both comparisons (p = 0.0002 and 0.03, respectively). CONCLUSIONS From this study, it was evident that the CAMNBS did not increase postoperative CM compared with that seen using the conventional radiographic method, and hence can be used in clinical practice.

Spine ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 45 (19) ◽  
pp. 1335-1340
Author(s):  
Jiandang Zhang ◽  
Zheng Wang ◽  
Pengfei Chi ◽  
Cheng Chi

2018 ◽  
Vol 12 (2) ◽  
pp. 335-342
Author(s):  
Yoshiaki Oda ◽  
Tomoyuki Takigawa ◽  
Ryo Ugawa ◽  
Yasuyuki Shiozaki ◽  
Haruo Misawa ◽  
...  

<sec><title>Study Design</title><p>Cross sectional study.</p></sec><sec><title>Purpose</title><p>To clarify the difference in position of the psoas muscle between adult spinal deformity (ASD) and lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS).</p></sec><sec><title>Overview of Literature</title><p>Although it is known that the psoas major muscle deviates in ASD patients, no report is available regarding the difference in comparison with LSS patients.</p></sec><sec><title>Methods</title><p>This study investigates 39 patients. For evaluating spinal alignment, pelvic tilt (PT), pelvic incidence (PI), sacral slope, lumbar lordosis (LL), PI–LL, Cobb angle, and the convex side, the lumbar curves were measured. For measuring the position of the psoas major at the L4/5 disk level, magnetic resonance imaging was used. The displacements of psoas major muscle were measured separately in the anterior–posterior and lateral directions. We examined the relationship between the radiographic parameters and anterior displacement (AD) and lateral displacement (LD) of the psoas major muscle.</p></sec><sec><title>Results</title><p>AD was demonstrated in 15 cases with ASD and nine cases with LSS (<italic>p</italic>&gt;0.05). LD was observed in 13 cases with ASD and no cases with LSS (<italic>p</italic>&lt;0.01). The Cobb angle was significantly greater in cases with AD than in those without AD (<italic>p</italic>=0.04). PT, LL, PI–LL, and Cobb angle were significantly greater in cases with LD (<italic>p</italic>&lt;0.05). All cases with LD had AD, but no case without AD had LD (<italic>p</italic>&lt;0.001). The side of greater displacement at L4/5 and the convex side of the lumbar curve were consistent in all cases.</p></sec><sec><title>Conclusions</title><p>Despite AD being observed in LSS as well, LD was observed only in the ASD group. Radiographic parameters were worse when LD was seen, rather than AD.</p></sec>


2016 ◽  
Vol 4 (4) ◽  
pp. 323-329 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tamir Ailon ◽  
Justin K. Scheer ◽  
Virginie Lafage ◽  
Frank J. Schwab ◽  
Eric Klineberg ◽  
...  

2016 ◽  
Vol 91 ◽  
pp. 199-204 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jamal McClendon ◽  
Randall B. Graham ◽  
Patrick A. Sugrue ◽  
Timothy R. Smith ◽  
Sara E. Thompson ◽  
...  

2014 ◽  
Vol 14 (11) ◽  
pp. S100
Author(s):  
Virginie Lafage ◽  
Frank J. Schwab ◽  
Justin K. Scheer ◽  
Eric O. Klineberg ◽  
Daniel M. Sciubba ◽  
...  

JBJS Reviews ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 6 (5) ◽  
pp. e2-e2 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sravisht Iyer ◽  
Evan Sheha ◽  
Michael C. Fu ◽  
Jeffrey Varghese ◽  
Matthew E. Cunningham ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document