Clinical and Radiographic Evaluation of the Adult Spinal Deformity Patient

Neurosurgery Clinics of North America

Volumn 24, Issue 2, 2013, Pages 143-156

  Smith, Justin S ^a   Shaffrey, Christopher I ^a   Fu, Kai Ming G ^b   Scheer, Justin K ^c   Bess, Shay ^d   Lafage, Virginie ^e   Schwab, Frank ^e   Ames, Christopher P ^f  

^a UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA   (United States)

^b WEILL CORNELL MEDICAL COLLEGE   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^d Rocky Mountain Hospital for Children   (United States)

^e NYU HOSPITAL FOR JOINT DISEASES   (United States)

^f UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Adult; Clinical; Deformity; Imaging; Radiographic; Spine

Indexed keywords

ADOLESCENT IDIOPATHIC SCOLIOSIS; ADULT SPINAL DEFORMITY; ARTHRODESIS; CERVICAL SPINE; CLINICAL EVALUATION; COMORBIDITY; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; DECOMPRESSION SURGERY; DISEASE ASSOCIATION; ELECTIVE SURGERY; HUMAN; KYPHOSCOLIOSIS; LORDOSIS; LOW BACK PAIN; LUMBAR SPINE; MEDICAL HISTORY; MYELOGRAPHY; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REVIEW; SPINE MALFORMATION; SPINE RADIOGRAPHY; SPINE SURGERY; SPONDYLOLISTHESIS; SURGICAL APPROACH; THORACIC SPINE; THREE DIMENSIONAL IMAGING; TREATMENT PLANNING;

AGED; HUMANS; KYPHOSIS; MAGNETIC RESONANCE ANGIOGRAPHY; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MALE; MYELOGRAPHY; NEUROLOGIC EXAMINATION; ORTHOPEDIC PROCEDURES; PHYSICAL EXAMINATION; SCOLIOSIS; SPINAL DISEASES; SPINE; SPONDYLOLISTHESIS; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED;

EID: 84875906171     PISSN: 10423680     EISSN: 15581349     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.nec.2012.12.009     Document Type: Review

References (36)

1. Lenke L. SRS terminology committee and working group on spinal classification revised glossary terms. 2000. (Accessed on November 30, 2012). http://www.srs.org/professionals/glossary/glossary.php.
2. Stokes I.A. Three-dimensional terminology of spinal deformity. A report presented to the Scoliosis Research Society by the Scoliosis Research Society Working Group on 3-D terminology of spinal deformity. Spine 1994, 19(2):236-248.
3. Bess S., Boachie-Adjei O., Burton D., et al. Pain and disability determine treatment modality for older patients with adult scoliosis, while deformity guides treatment for younger patients. Spine 2009, 34(20):2186-2190.
4. Smith J.S., Fu K.M., Urban P., et al. Neurological symptoms and deficits in adults with scoliosis who present to a surgical clinic: incidence and association with the choice of operative versus nonoperative management. J Neurosurg Spine 2008, 9(4):326-331.
5. Smith J.S., Shaffrey C.I., Berven S., et al. Operative versus nonoperative treatment of leg pain in adults with scoliosis: a retrospective review of a prospective multicenter database with two-year follow-up. Spine 2009, 34(16):1693-1698.
6. Smith J.S., Shaffrey C.I., Berven S., et al. Improvement of back pain with operative and nonoperative treatment in adults with scoliosis. Neurosurgery 2009, 65(1):86-93. [discussion: 93-4].
7. Smith J.S., Shaffrey C.I., Glassman S.D., et al. Risk-benefit assessment of surgery for adult scoliosis: an analysis based on patient age. Spine 2011, 36(10):817-824.
8. Koch K.D., Buchanan R., Birch J.G., et al. Adolescents undergoing surgery for idiopathic scoliosis: how physical and psychological characteristics relate to patient satisfaction with the cosmetic result. Spine 2001, 26(19):2119-2124.
9. Smith P.L., Donaldson S., Hedden D., et al. Parents' and patients' perceptions of postoperative appearance in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Spine 2006, 31(20):2367-2374.
10. Smith J.S., Kasliwal M.K., Crawford A., et al. Outcomes, expectations, and complications overview for the surgical treatment of adult and pediatric spinal deformity. Spine Deformity 2012, (Preview Issue):4-14.
11. Fu K.M., Smith J.S., Sansur C.A., et al. Standardized measures of health status and disability and the decision to pursue operative treatment in elderly patients with degenerative scoliosis. Neurosurgery 2010, 66(1):42-47. [discussion: 47].
12. Kasliwal M.K., Smith J.S., Shaffrey C.I., et al. Does prior short-segment surgery for adult scoliosis impact perioperative complication rates and clinical outcome among patients undergoing scoliosis correction?. J Neurosurg Spine 2012, 17(2):128-133.
13. Ames C.P., Smith J.S., Scheer J.K., et al. Impact of spinopelvic alignment on decision making in deformity surgery in adults: a review. J Neurosurg Spine 2012, 16(6):547-564.
14. Blondel B., Schwab F., Ungar B., et al. Impact of magnitude and percentage of global sagittal plane correction on health-related quality of life at 2-years follow-up. Neurosurgery 2012, 71(2):341-348.
15. Glassman S.D., Berven S., Bridwell K., et al. Correlation of radiographic parameters and clinical symptoms in adult scoliosis. Spine 2005, 30(6):682-688.
16. Glassman S.D., Bridwell K., Dimar J.R., et al. The impact of positive sagittal balance in adult spinal deformity. Spine 2005, 30(18):2024-2029.
17. Jackson R.P., McManus A.C. Radiographic analysis of sagittal plane alignment and balance in standing volunteers and patients with low back pain matched for age, sex, and size. A prospective controlled clinical study. Spine 1994, 19(14):1611-1618.
18. Lafage V., Smith J.S., Bess S., et al. Sagittal spino-pelvic alignment failures following three column thoracic osteotomy for adult spinal deformity. Eur Spine J 2012, 21(4):698-704.
19. Schwab F., Farcy J.P., Bridwell K., et al. A clinical impact classification of scoliosis in the adult. Spine 2006, 31(18):2109-2114.
20. Schwab F., Lafage V., Patel A., et al. Sagittal plane considerations and the pelvis in the adult patient. Spine 2009, 34(17):1828-1833.
21. Boulay C., Tardieu C., Hecquet J., et al. Sagittal alignment of spine and pelvis regulated by pelvic incidence: standard values and prediction of lordosis. Eur Spine J 2006, 15(4):415-422.
22. Klineberg E., Schwab F., Ames C., et al. Acute reciprocal changes distant from the site of spinal osteotomies affect global postoperative alignment. Adv Orthop 2011, 2011:415946.
23. Lafage V., Ames C., Schwab F., et al. Changes in thoracic kyphosis negatively impact sagittal alignment after lumbar pedicle subtraction osteotomy: a comprehensive radiographic analysis. Spine 2012, 37(3):E180-E187.
24. Lafage V., Bharucha N.J., Schwab F., et al. Multicenter validation of a formula predicting postoperative spinopelvic alignment. J Neurosurg Spine 2012, 16(1):15-21.
25. Schwab F.J., Patel A., Shaffrey C.I., et al. Sagittal realignment failures following pedicle subtraction osteotomy surgery: are we doing enough?: clinical article. J Neurosurg Spine 2012, 16(6):539-546.
26. Smith J.S., Bess S., Shaffrey C.I., et al. Dynamic changes of the pelvis and spine are key to predicting postoperative sagittal alignment after pedicle subtraction osteotomy: a critical analysis of preoperative planning techniques. Spine 2012, 37(10):845-853.
27. Smith J.S., Shaffrey C.I., Lafage V., et al. Spontaneous improvement of cervical alignment after correction of global sagittal balance following pedicle subtraction osteotomy. J Neurosurg Spine 2012, 17(4):300-307.
28. Schwab F., Bess S., Blondel B., et al. Combined assessment of pelvic tilt, pelvic incidence or lumbar lordosis mismatch, and sagittal vertical axis predicts disability in adult spinal deformity: a prospective analysis. Spine 2012.
29. Angevine P.D., Kaiser M.G. Radiographic measurement techniques. Neurosurgery 2008, 63(Suppl 3):40-45.
30. Morrissy R.T., Goldsmith G.S., Hall E.C., et al. Measurement of the Cobb angle on radiographs of patients who have scoliosis. Evaluation of intrinsic error. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1990, 72(3):320-327.
31. Gstoettner M., Sekyra K., Walochnik N., et al. Inter- and intraobserver reliability assessment of the Cobb angle: manual versus digital measurement tools. Eur Spine J 2007, 16(10):1587-1592.
32. Kuklo T.R., Potter B.K., Schroeder T.M., et al. Comparison of manual and digital measurements in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Spine 2006, 31(11):1240-1246.
33. Mok J.M., Berven S.H., Diab M., et al. Comparison of observer variation in conventional and three digital radiographic methods used in the evaluation of patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Spine 2008, 33(6):681-686.
34. Nash C.L., Moe J.H. A study of vertebral rotation. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1969, 51(2):223-229.
35. Lam G.C., Hill D.L., Le L.H., et al. Vertebral rotation measurement: a summary and comparison of common radiographic and CT methods. Scoliosis 2008, 3:16.
36. Schwab F., Patel A., Ungar B., et al. Adult spinal deformity-postoperative standing imbalance: how much can you tolerate? An overview of key parameters in assessing alignment and planning corrective surgery. Spine 2010, 35(25):2224-2231.