sagittal balance
Recently Published Documents


TOTAL DOCUMENTS

440
(FIVE YEARS 156)

H-INDEX

38
(FIVE YEARS 4)

2022 ◽  
pp. 1-7

OBJECTIVE The authors’ objective was to investigate whether sagittal balance improves in patients with spinal stenosis after decompression alone. METHODS This prospective longitudinal cohort study compared preoperative and 6-month postoperative 36-inch full-length radiographs in patients aged older than 60 years. Patients underwent decompression alone for central lumbar spinal stenosis with either a minimally invasive bilateral laminotomy for central decompression, unilateral laminectomy as an over-the-top procedure for bilateral decompression, or traditional wide laminectomy with removal of the spinous processes on both sides. The following radiographic parameters were measured: sagittal vertical axis (SVA), lumbar lordosis (LL), pelvic tilt (PT), pelvic incidence (PI), PI-LL mismatch, coronal Cobb angle, and sacral slope (SS). Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) were collected, including scores on the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), visual analog scale (VAS) for leg and back pain, and EQ-5D. RESULTS Forty-five patients (24 males) with a mean ± SD age of 71.8 ± 5.6 years were included. Sagittal balance showed statistically significant improvement, with the mean SVA decreasing from 52.3 mm preoperatively to 33.9 mm postoperatively (p = 0.0001). The authors found an increase in LL, from mean −41.5° preoperatively to −43.9° postoperatively, but this was not statistically significant (p = 0.055). A statistically significant decrease in PI-LL mismatch from mean 8.4° preoperatively to 5.8° postoperatively was found (p = 0.002). All PROM scores showed significant improvement after spinal decompression surgery. The correlations between SVA and all PROMs were statistically significant at both preoperative and postoperative time points, although most correlations were weak except for those between preoperative SVA and ODI (r = 0.55) and between SVA and VAS for leg pain (r = 0.58). CONCLUSIONS Sagittal balance and PROMs show improvement at short-term follow-up evaluations in patients who have undergone decompression alone for lumbar spinal stenosis.


2021 ◽  
Vol 6 (12) ◽  
pp. 1193-1202
Author(s):  
Juan I. Cirillo Totera ◽  
José G. Fleiderman Valenzuela ◽  
Jorge A. Garrido Arancibia ◽  
Samuel T. Pantoja Contreras ◽  
Lyonel Beaulieu Lalanne ◽  
...  

Adequate sagittal balance (SB) is essential to maintain an upright, efficient, and painless posture. It has been shown that sagittal profile alterations affect quality of life of patients with a similar or even greater impact than chronic disease. Evaluation of the SB has gained much relevance in recent years, with recognition of its importance in the evaluation of spinal pathology. This review summarizes the basic principles of SB, aiming to obtain a practical, simple and understandable evaluation of the sagittal profile of a patient. SB is a dynamic process that involves a varying degree of energy expenditure. Distinguishing between a balanced, compensated imbalance or decompensated imbalanced patient, is relevant to diagnosis and therapeutic decision-making. Cite this article: EFORT Open Rev 2021;6:1193-1202. DOI: 10.1302/2058-5241.6.210062


2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Quan Zhou ◽  
Jun-xin Zhang ◽  
Yi-fei Zheng ◽  
Yun Teng ◽  
Hui-lin Yang ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Few reports to date have evaluated the effects of different pedicle screw insertion depths on sagittal balance and prognosis after posterior lumbar interbody and fusion (PLIF) in patients with lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis (LDS). Methods A total of 88 patients with single-level PLIF for LDS from January 2018 to December 2019 were enrolled. Long screw group (Group L): 52 patients underwent long pedicle screw fixation (the leading edge of the screw exceeded 80% of the anteroposterior diameter of vertebral body). Short screw group (Group S): 36 patients underwent short pedicle screw fixation (the leading edge of the screw was less than 60% of the anteroposterior diameter of vertebral body). Local deformity parameters of spondylolisthesis including slip degree (SD) and segment lordosis (SL), spino-pelvic sagittal plane parameters including pelvic incidence (PI), pelvic tilt (PT), sacral slope (SS) and lumbar lordosis (LL), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and Visual Analog Scale (VAS) for back pain of both groups were compared. Postoperative complications, including vertebral fusion rate and screw loosening rate, were recorded. Results Except that PI in Group S at the final follow-up was not statistically different from the preoperative value (P > 0.05), other parameters were significantly improved compared with preoperative values one month after surgery and at the final follow-up (P < 0.05). There was no significant difference in parameters between Group L and Group S before and one month after surgery (P > 0.05). At the final follow-up, SD, SL, LL, PT and PI-LL differed significantly between the two groups (P < 0.05). Compared with the preoperative results, ODI and VAS in both groups decreased significantly one month after surgery and at the final follow-up (P < 0.05). Significant differences of ODI and VAS were found between the two groups at the final follow-up (P < 0.05). Postoperative complications were not statistically significant between the two groups (P > 0.05). Conclusions PLIF can significantly improve the prognosis of patients with LDS. In terms of outcomes with an average follow-up time of 2 years, the deeper the screw depth is within the safe range, the better the spino-pelvic sagittal balance may be restored and the better the quality of life may be.


2021 ◽  
Vol 2 (10) ◽  
pp. 813-824
Author(s):  
Till Dominic Lerch ◽  
Adam Boschung ◽  
Florian Schmaranzer ◽  
Inga A. S. Todorski ◽  
Jan Vanlommel ◽  
...  

Aims The effect of pelvic tilt (PT) and sagittal balance in hips with pincer-type femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) with acetabular retroversion (AR) is controversial. It is unclear if patients with AR have a rotational abnormality of the iliac wing. Therefore, we asked: are parameters for sagittal balance, and is rotation of the iliac wing, different in patients with AR compared to a control group?; and is there a correlation between iliac rotation and acetabular version? Methods A retrospective, review board-approved, controlled study was performed including 120 hips in 86 consecutive patients with symptomatic FAI or hip dysplasia. Pelvic CT scans were reviewed to calculate parameters for sagittal balance (pelvic incidence (PI), PT, and sacral slope), anterior pelvic plane angle, pelvic inclination, and external rotation of the iliac wing and were compared to a control group (48 hips). The 120 hips were allocated to the following groups: AR (41 hips), hip dysplasia (47 hips) and cam FAI with normal acetabular morphology (32 hips). Subgroups of total AR (15 hips) and high acetabular anteversion (20 hips) were analyzed. Statistical analysis was performed using analysis of variance with Bonferroni correction. Results PI and PT were significantly decreased comparing AR (PI 42° (SD 10°), PT 4° (SD 5°)) with dysplastic hips (PI 55° (SD 12°), PT 10° (SD 6°)) and with the control group (PI 51° (SD 9°) and PT 13° (SD 7°)) (p < 0.001). External rotation of the iliac wing was significantly increased comparing AR (29° (SD 4°)) with dysplastic hips (20°(SD 5°)) and with the control group (25° (SD 5°)) (p < 0.001). Correlation between external rotation of the iliac wing and acetabular version was significant and strong (r = 0.81; p < 0.001). Correlation between PT and acetabular version was significant and moderate (r = 0.58; p < 0.001). Conclusion These findings could contribute to a better understanding of hip pain in a sitting position and extra-articular subspine FAI of patients with AR. These patients have increased iliac external rotation, a rotational abnormality of the iliac wing. This has implications for surgical therapy with hip arthroscopy and acetabular rim trimming or anteverting periacetabular osteotomy (PAO). Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2021;2(10):813–824.


2021 ◽  
Vol 90 ◽  
pp. 196-197
Author(s):  
G. Rebeyrat ◽  
W. Skalli ◽  
A. Massaad ◽  
H. Pillet ◽  
K. Semaan ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol 90 ◽  
pp. 194-195
Author(s):  
R. Rachkidi ◽  
A. Massaad ◽  
K. Semaan ◽  
K. Abi Karam ◽  
M. Fakhoury ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document