European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society
-
The differences in sagittal spino-pelvic alignment between adults with chronic low back pain (LBP) and the normal population are still poorly understood. In particular, it is still unknown if particular patterns of sagittal spino-pelvic alignment are more prevalent in chronic LBP. The current study helps to better understand the relationship between sagittal alignment and low back pain. ⋯ Sagittal spino-pelvic alignment was different between patients with chronic LBP and controls. In particular, there was a greater proportion of chronic LBP patients with low SS, low LL and small PI, suggesting the relationship between this specific pattern and the presence of chronic LBP.
-
Comparative Study
Lumbo-pelvic lordosis and the pelvic radius technique in the assessment of spinal sagittal balance: strengths and caveats.
The two main methodologies described for the assessment of spinal sagittal alignment are the pelvic radius (PR) technique and that based on measures of the Pelvic Incidence (PI) and Spino-Sacral Angle (SSA). Both methods stress the fundamental relationship between the anatomical position and orientation of the sacrum within the pelvis and the spinal curves above. The aim of the current study was to assess the strengths and potential weaknesses of the PR technique. The PR technique uses measures based on a line (the PR), drawn between the hip axis and the posterior corner of the S1 endplate. The angle formed between the PR line and the sacral endplate, PRS1, is a developmental measure of sacropelvic morphology. Geometrically, PI and PRS1 are approximately complementary angles and both reflect reciprocal alterations in pelvic tilt (for PI) or angulation (for PRS1) and the slope of the S1 endplate. The angle formed between PR and T12, the PR-T12, reflects a combined measure of pelvic morphology and lumbar lordosis. It appears to be a useful measure, which provides a simple and rapid assessment of lumbopelvic sagittal balance, but only in the presence of a congruent thoracic curvature. ⋯ Errors can occur using the PR technique if the PRT12 is viewed in isolation from the thoracic kyphosis. We found the ratio of the thoracic kyphosis to lumbar lordosis (T4-T12/T12-S1) to be a useful predictor of congruent sagittal alignment, which may alert the clinician to situations where use of the PR-T12 in isolation may be misleading.
-
Posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) is a popular procedure for treating lumbar canal stenosis with spinal instability, and several reports concerning fusion assessment methods exist. However, there are currently no definitive criteria for diagnosing a successful interbody fusion in the lumbar spine. We suggested evaluating fusion status using computed tomography (CT) in extension position to detect pseudoarthrosis more precisely. ⋯ Extension CT could detect pseudoarthrosis more clearly than flexion-extension radiography and flexion CT. The CT images are influenced by body position and dilating anterior disc space in extension CT contributes to detect pseudoarthrodesis. Thus, extension CT was a useful method for assessing fusion status after PLIF.
-
Clinical Trial
Thoracolumbar imbalance analysis for osteotomy planification using a new method: FBI technique.
Treatment of spine imbalance by posterior osteotomy is a valuable technique. Several surgical techniques have been developed and proposed to redress the vertebral column in harmonious kyphosis in order to recreate correct sagittal alignment. Although surgical techniques proved to be adequate, preoperative planning still is mediocre. Multiple suggestions have been proposed, from cutting tracing paper to ingenious mathematical formulas and computerised models. The analysis of the pelvic parameters to try to recover the initial shape of the spine before the spine imbalance occurred is very important to avoid mistakes during the osteotomy planification. ⋯ This FBI technique can be used even for small lordosis restoration: it gave a good evaluation of the amount of correction needed and then the surgeon had the choice to use the appropriate technique to obtain a good balance.
-
Comparative Study
Kinematic evaluation of the adjacent segments after lumbar instrumented surgery: a comparison between rigid fusion and dynamic non-fusion stabilization.
The aim of the current study was to evaluate changes in lumbar kinematics after lumbar monosegmental instrumented surgery with rigid fusion and dynamic non-fusion stabilization. A total of 77 lumbar spinal stenosis patients with L4 degenerative spondylolisthesis underwent L4-5 monosegmental posterior instrumented surgery. Of these, 36 patients were treated with rigid fusion (transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion) and 41 with dynamic stabilization [segmental spinal correction system (SSCS)]. ⋯ At final follow-up, all of the lumbar segments with rigid fusion demonstrated significantly greater disc degeneration than those with dynamic stabilization. Our results suggest that the SSCS preserved 14% of the kinematical operations at the instrumented segment. The SSCS may prevent excessive effects on adjacent segmental kinematics and may prevent the incidence of adjacent segment disorder.