Impact of sagittal spinopelvic alignment on clinical outcomes after decompression surgery for lumbar spinal canal stenosis without coronal imbalance
- PMID: 26140404
- DOI: 10.3171/2015.1.SPINE14642
Impact of sagittal spinopelvic alignment on clinical outcomes after decompression surgery for lumbar spinal canal stenosis without coronal imbalance
Abstract
Object: The object of this study was to investigate correlations between sagittal spinopelvic alignment and improvements in clinical and quality-of-life (QOL) outcomes after lumbar decompression surgery for lumbar spinal canal stenosis (LCS) without coronal imbalance.
Methods: The authors retrospectively reviewed data from consecutive patients treated for LCS with decompression surgery in the period from 2009 through 2011. They examined correlations between preoperative or postoperative sagittal vertical axis (SVA) and radiological parameters, clinical outcomes, and health-related (HR)QOL scores in patients divided according to SVA. Clinical outcomes were assessed according to Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) and visual analog scale (VAS) scores. Health-related QOL was evaluated using the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ) and the JOA Back Pain Evaluation Questionnaire (JOABPEQ).
Results: One hundred nine patients were eligible for inclusion in the study. Compared to patients with normal sagittal alignment prior to surgery (Group A: SVA < 50 mm), those with preoperative sagittal imbalance (Group B: SVA ≥ 50 mm) had significantly smaller lumbar lordosis and thoracic kyphosis angles and larger pelvic tilt. In Group B, there was a significant decrease in postoperative SVA compared with the preoperative SVA (76.3 ± 29.7 mm vs. 54.3 ± 39.8 mm, p = 0.004). The patients in Group B with severe preoperative sagittal imbalance (SVA > 80 mm) had residual sagittal imbalance after surgery (82.8 ± 41.6 mm). There were no significant differences in clinical and HRQOL outcomes between Groups A and B. Compared to patients with normal postoperative SVA (Group C: SVA < 50 mm), patients with a postoperative SVA ≥ 50 mm (Group D) had significantly lower JOABPEQ scores, both preoperative and postoperative, for walking ability (preop: 36.6 ± 26.3 vs. 22.7 ± 26.0, p = 0.038, respectively; postop: 71.1 ± 30.4 vs. 42.5 ± 29.6, p < 0.001) and social functioning (preop: 38.7 ± 18.5 vs. 30.2 ± 16.7, p = 0.045; postop: 67.0 ± 25.8 vs. 49.6 ± 20.0, p = 0.001), as well as significantly higher postoperative RMDQ (4.9 ± 5.2 vs. 7.9 ± 5.7, p = 0.015) and VAS scores for low-back pain (2.68 ± 2.69 vs. 3.94 ± 2.59, p = 0.039).
Conclusions: Preoperative sagittal balance was not significantly correlated with clinical or HRQOL outcomes after decompression surgery in LCS patients without coronal imbalance. Decompression surgery improved the SVA value in patients with preoperative sagittal imbalance; however, the patients with severe preoperative sagittal imbalance (SVA > 80 mm) had residual imbalance after decompression surgery. Both clinical and HRQOL outcomes were negatively affected by postoperative residual sagittal imbalance.
Keywords: C7-CSVL = C-7 plumb line deviation from the central sacral vertical line; EBL = estimated blood loss; HRQOL = health-related quality of life; JOA = Japanese Orthopaedic Association; JOABPEQ = JOA Back Pain Evaluation Questionnaire; LBP = low-back pain; LCS = lumbar spinal canal stenosis; MCID = minimum clinically important difference; RMDQ = Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire; SVA = sagittal vertical axis; VAS = visual analog scale; decompression surgery; lumbar spinal canal stenosis; sagittal vertical axis; spinopelvic alignment.
Similar articles
-
The influence of preoperative spinal sagittal balance on clinical outcomes after microendoscopic laminotomy in patients with lumbar spinal canal stenosis.J Neurosurg Spine. 2015 Jul;23(1):49-54. doi: 10.3171/2014.11.SPINE14452. Epub 2015 Apr 3. J Neurosurg Spine. 2015. PMID: 25840041
-
Factors associated with improvement in sagittal spinal alignment after microendoscopic laminotomy in patients with lumbar spinal canal stenosis.J Neurosurg Spine. 2016 Jul;25(1):39-45. doi: 10.3171/2015.12.SPINE15805. Epub 2016 Mar 11. J Neurosurg Spine. 2016. PMID: 26967988
-
The sagittal spinal profile type: a principal precondition for surgical decision making in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis.J Neurosurg Spine. 2017 Nov;27(5):552-559. doi: 10.3171/2017.3.SPINE161269. Epub 2017 Sep 1. J Neurosurg Spine. 2017. PMID: 28862573
-
Spontaneous correction of sagittal spinopelvic malalignment after decompression surgery without corrective fusion procedure for lumbar spinal stenosis and its impact on clinical outcomes: A systematic review.J Orthop Sci. 2020 May;25(3):379-383. doi: 10.1016/j.jos.2019.05.021. Epub 2019 Jun 22. J Orthop Sci. 2020. PMID: 31235197
-
C5 palsy following posterior decompression and instrumentation in cervical stenosis: Single center experience and review.Clin Neurol Neurosurg. 2018 Nov;174:29-35. doi: 10.1016/j.clineuro.2018.08.028. Epub 2018 Aug 22. Clin Neurol Neurosurg. 2018. PMID: 30195898 Review.
Cited by
-
Improvement of Lower Back Pain in Lumbar Spinal Stenosis After Decompression Surgery and Factors That Predict Residual Lower Back Pain.Global Spine J. 2021 Mar;11(2):212-218. doi: 10.1177/2192568220905617. Epub 2020 Feb 17. Global Spine J. 2021. PMID: 32875871 Free PMC article.
-
The Relationship between T1 Sagittal Angle and Sagittal Balance: A Retrospective Study of 119 Healthy Volunteers.PLoS One. 2016 Aug 11;11(8):e0160957. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0160957. eCollection 2016. PLoS One. 2016. PMID: 27513865 Free PMC article.
-
Relationships between Spinal Sarcopenia and Spinal Sagittal Balance in Older Women.Ann Geriatr Med Res. 2019 Sep;23(3):141-148. doi: 10.4235/agmr.19.0030. Epub 2019 Sep 25. Ann Geriatr Med Res. 2019. PMID: 32743302 Free PMC article.
-
Effect of lumbar laminectomy on spinal sagittal alignment: a systematic review.Eur Spine J. 2021 Sep;30(9):2413-2426. doi: 10.1007/s00586-021-06827-y. Epub 2021 Apr 12. Eur Spine J. 2021. PMID: 33844059
-
Association of Craniocervical Sagittal Alignment With the Outcomes of Cervical Disc Replacement.Global Spine J. 2024 Apr;14(3):846-855. doi: 10.1177/21925682221124531. Epub 2022 Aug 31. Global Spine J. 2024. PMID: 36044545 Free PMC article.
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical
Miscellaneous