Radiographical spinopelvic parameters and disability in the setting of adult spinal deformity: A prospective multicenter analysis

Spine

Volumn 38, Issue 13, 2013, Pages

  Schwab, Frank J ^a   Blondel, Benjamin ^a,b   Bess, Shay ^c   Hostin, Richard ^d   Shaffrey, Christopher I ^e   Smith, Justin S ^e   Boachie Adjei, Oheneba ^f   Burton, Douglas C ^g   Akbarnia, Behrooz A ^h   Mundis, Gregory M ^h   Ames, Christopher P ⁱ   Kebaish, Khaled ^j   Hart, Robert A ^k   Farcy, Jean Pierre ^l   Lafage, Virginie ^a  

^a NYU HOSPITAL FOR JOINT DISEASES   (United States)

^b AIX MARSEILLE UNIVERSITY   (France)

^c Rocky Mountain Hospital for Children   (United States)

^d Baylor Scoliosis Center   (United States)

^e UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA   (United States)

^f HOSPITAL FOR SPECIAL SURGERY   (United States)

^g UNIVERSITY OF KANSAS SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^h SAN DIEGO CENTER FOR SPINAL DISORDERS   (United States)

ⁱ UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^j JOHNS HOPKINS HOSPITAL   (United States)

^k OREGON HEALTH AND SCIENCE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^l MAIMONIDES MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

more..

Author keywords

Adult spinal deformity; Conservative care; Disability; Health related quality of life; Patient assessment; Prediction; Prospective analysis; Radiographical parameters; Sagittal alignment; Surgery

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ADULT SPINAL DEFORMITY; AGED; ARTICLE; BIOMECHANICS; CONSERVATIVE TREATMENT; CONTROLLED STUDY; DATA BASE; FEMALE; HUMAN; KYPHOSIS; LORDOSIS; LUMBOSACRAL SPINE; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; OSWESTRY DISABILITY INDEX; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PELVIC INCIDENCE; PELVIC TILT; PELVIS RADIOGRAPHY; PHYSICAL ACTIVITY; PHYSICAL DISABILITY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; QUALITY OF LIFE; QUESTIONNAIRE; RADIOLOGICAL PARAMETERS; SCOLIOSIS RESEARCH SOCIETY 22R QUESTIONNAIRE; SCORING SYSTEM; SHORT FORM 12; SOCIAL LIFE; SPINE MALFORMATION; SPINE RADIOGRAPHY; SPINE SURGERY; THORACOLUMBAR SPINE;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; DISABILITY EVALUATION; FEMALE; HUMANS; LINEAR MODELS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PELVIS; PROGNOSIS; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; QUALITY OF LIFE; QUESTIONNAIRES; RADIOGRAPHY; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SCOLIOSIS; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; SPINE; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84879126827     PISSN: 03622436     EISSN: 15281159     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e318292b7b9     Document Type: Article

References (34)

1. Schwab F, Dubey A, Gamez L, et al. Adult scoliosis: prevalence, SF-36, and nutritional parameters in an elderly volunteer population. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2005; 30: 1082-5.
2. Cho KJ, Suk SI, Park SR, et al. Risk factors of sagittal decompensation after long posterior instrumentation and fusion for degenerative lumbar scoliosis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2010; 35: 1595-601.
3. Glassman SD, Berven S, Bridwell K, et al. Correlation of radiographic parameters and clinical symptoms in adult scoliosis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2005; 30: 682-8.
4. Glassman SD, Bridwell K, Dimar JR, et al. The impact of positive sagittal balance in adult spinal deformity. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2005; 30: 2024-9.
5. Kim YJ, Bridwell KH, Lenke LG, et al. An analysis of sagittal spinal alignment following long adult lumbar instrumentation and fusion to L5 or S1: can we predict ideal lumbar lordosis ? Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2006; 31: 2343-52.
6. Smith JS, Bess S, Shaffrey CI, et al. Dynamic changes of the pelvis and spine are key to predicting postoperative sagittal alignment following pedicle subtraction osteotomy: a critical analysis of preoperative planning techniques. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2011; 37 (10): 845-53.
7. Duval-Beaupere G, Schmidt C, Cosson P. A Barycentremetric study of the sagittal shape of spine and pelvis: the conditions required for an economic standing position. Ann Biomed Eng 1992; 20: 451-62.
8. Legaye J, Duval-Beaupere G, Hecquet J, et al. Pelvic incidence: a fundamental pelvic parameter for three-dimensional regulation of spinal sagittal curves. Eur Spine J 1998; 7: 99-103.
9. Boulay C, Tardieu C, Hecquet J, et al. Sagittal alignment of spine and pelvis regulated by pelvic incidence: standard values and prediction of lordosis. [published online ahead of print September 23, 2005] Eur Spine J 2006; 15: 415-22.
10. Schwab F, Lafage V, Patel A, et al. Sagittal plane considerations and the pelvis in the adult patient. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2009; 34: 1828-33.
11. Lafage V, Schwab F, Patel A, et al. Pelvic tilt and truncal inclination: two key radiographic parameters in the setting of adults with spinal deformity. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2009; 34: E599-606.
12. Schwab F, Patel A, Ungar B, et al. Adult spinal deformitypostoperative standing imbalance: how much can you tolerate? An overview of key parameters in assessing alignment and planning corrective surgery. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2010; 35: 2224-31.
13. Champain S, Benchikh K, Nogier A, et al. Validation of new clinical quantitative analysis software applicable in spine orthopaedic studies. Eur Spine J 2006; 15: 982-91.
14. Rillardon L, Levassor N, Guigui P, et al. Validation of a tool to measure pelvic and spinal parameters of sagittal balance. Rev Chir Orthop Reparatrice Appar Mot 2003; 89: 218-27.
15. Fairbank JC, Couper J, Davies JB, et al. The Oswestry low back pain disability questionnaire. Physiotherapy 1980; 66: 271-3.
16. Fairbank JC, Pynsent PB. The oswestry disability index. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2000; 25: 2940-52; discussion 52.
17. Smith JS, Fu KM, 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: 326-31.
18. Li G, Passias P, Kozanek M, et al. Adult scoliosis in patients over sixty-five years of age: outcomes of operative versus nonoperative treatment at a minimum two-year follow-up. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2009; 34: 2165-70.
19. Smith JS, Shaffrey CI, 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 followup. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2009; 34: 1693-8.
20. Smith JS, Shaffrey CI, Berven S, et al. Improvement of back pain with operative and nonoperative treatment in adults with scoliosis. Neurosurgery 2009; 65: 86-93; discussion 4.
21. Smith JS, Shaffrey CI, Glassman SD, et al. Risk-benefit assessment of surgery for adult scoliosis: an analysis based on patient age. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2011; 36: 817-24.
22. Bridwell KH, Glassman S, Horton W, et al. Does treatment (nonoperative and operative) improve the two-year quality of life in patients with adult symptomatic lumbar scoliosis: a prospective multicenter evidence-based medicine study. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2009; 34: 2171-8.
23. Glassman SD, Schwab F, Bridwell KH, et al. Do 1-year outcomes predict 2-year outcomes for adult deformity surgery ? Spine J 2009; 9: 317-22.
24. Glassman SD, Carreon LY, Shaffrey CI, et al. The costs and benefits of nonoperative management for adult scoliosis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2010; 35: 578-82.
25. Schwab FJ, Smith VA, Biserni M, et al. Adult scoliosis: a quantitative radiographic and clinical analysis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2002; 27: 387-92.
26. Lafage V, Bharucha NJ, Schwab F, et al. Multicenter validation of a formula predicting postoperative spinopelvic alignment. J Neurosurg Spine 2012; 16: 15-21.
27. Fu KM, Smith JS, Sansur CA, 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: 42-7; discussion 7.
28. Bridwell KH. Decision making regarding Smith-Petersen vs. pedicle subtraction osteotomy vs. vertebral column resection for spinal deformity. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2006; 31: S171-8.
29. Schwab F, Lafage V, Boyce R, et al. Gravity line analysis in adult volunteers: age-related correlation with spinal parameters, pelvic parameters, and foot position. Spine 2006; 31: E959-67.
30. Berthonnaud E, Dimnet J, Roussouly P, et al. Analysis of the sagittal balance of the spine and pelvis using shape and orientation parameters. J Spinal Disord Tech 2005; 18: 40-7.
31. Vialle R, Levassor N, Rillardon L, et al. Radiographic analysis of the sagittal alignment and balance of the spine in asymptomatic subjects. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2005; 87: 260-7.
32. Legaye J, Duval-Beaupere G, Hecquet J, et al. Pelvic incidence: a fundamental pelvic parameter for three-dimensional regulation of spinal sagittal curves. Eur Spine J 1998; 7: 99-103.
33. 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: 415-22.
34. Roussouly P, Gollogly S, Noseda O, et al. The vertical projection of the sum of the ground reactive forces of a standing patient is not the same as the C7 plumb line: a radiographic study of the sagittal alignment of 153 asymptomatic volunteers. Spine 2006; 31: E320-5.