Aaron J. Buckland

Acetabular Anteversion Changes Due to Spinal Deformity Correction: Bridging the Gap Between Hip and Spine Surgeons

BACKGROUND Hip osteoarthritis often coexists with adult spinal deformity, an abnormality in which sagittal spinopelvic malalignment is present. Debate exists whether to perform spinal realignment correction or total hip arthroplasty first. Hip extension and pelvic tilt are important compensatory mechanisms in the setting of sagittal spinopelvic malalignment and change after spinal realignment. We performed this study to evaluate the effect that the spinal realignment surgical procedure has on acetabular anteversion. METHODS This study is a retrospective review of a multicenter, prospective, consecutive database of patients with adult spinal deformity who underwent surgical spinal realignment. Only patients who already had undergone a total hip arthroplasty prior to the spinal realignment procedure were retained for analysis. Patients were excluded if they had insufficient imaging or large-head, metal-on-metal bearings or they had undergone revision total hip arthroplasty in the study period. Acetabular anteversion was calculated via the ellipse method on a standing, posterior-anterior, 90-cm radiograph with a well-centered pelvis. Anteversion was measured preoperatively and at six weeks or three months after the spinal realignment procedure. Spinopelvic parameters measured included pelvic incidence, pelvic tilt, sacral slope, lumbar lordosis, T1 pelvic angle, sagittal vertical axis, T1-spinopelvic inclination, and thoracic kyphosis. RESULTS Forty-one hips (thirty-three patients) were identified. Acetabular anteversion significantly reduced (p < 0.001) after spinal correction by mean change of -4.96° (range, -22.32° to +2.36°). The change in anteversion correlated with the changes in sagittal pelvic orientation (0.828 for the pelvic tilt, -0.757 for the sacral slope, and -0.691 for the lumbar lordosis) and global spinopelvic alignment (0.579 for the sagittal vertical axis and 0.585 for the T1 pelvic angle). Regression analysis revealed that anteversion decreased by 1° for each of the following spinopelvic parameter changes (p < 0.001): 1.105° for spinopelvic tilt, 1.032° for sacral slope, and 3.163° for lumbar lordosis. CONCLUSIONS Patients with spinopelvic malalignment had a high prevalence of excessively anteverted acetabular components. Sagittal spinal correction following total hip arthroplasty resulted in reduced acetabular anteversion, which may have implications for stability. Changes in anteversion are most closely related to changes in pelvic tilt in an almost one-to-one ratio.

Dislocation of a primary total hip arthroplasty is more common in patients with a lumbar spinal fusion

Aims Lumbar fusion is known to reduce the variation in pelvic tilt between standing and sitting. A flexible lumbo‐pelvic unit increases the stability of total hip arthroplasty (THA) when seated by increasing anterior clearance and acetabular anteversion, thereby preventing impingement of the prosthesis. Lumbar fusion may eliminate this protective pelvic movement. The effect of lumbar fusion on the stability of total hip arthroplasty has not previously been investigated. Patients and Methods The Medicare database was searched for patients who had undergone THA and spinal fusion between 2005 and 2012. PearlDiver software was used to query the database by the International Classification of Diseases, 9th Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD‐9‐CM) procedural code for primary THA and lumbar spinal fusion. Patients who had undergone both lumbar fusion and THA were then divided into three groups: 1 to 2 levels, 3 to 7 levels and 8+ levels of fusion. The rate of dislocation in each group was established using ICD‐9‐CM codes. Patients who underwent THA without spinal fusion were used as a control group. Statistical significant difference between groups was tested using the chi‐squared test, and significance set at p < 0.05. Results At one‐year follow‐up, 14 747 patients were found to have had a THA after lumbar spinal fusion (12 079 1 to 2 levels, 2594 3 to 7 levels, 74 8+ levels). The control group consisted of 839 004 patients. The dislocation rate in the control group was 1.55%. A higher rate of dislocation was found in patients with a spinal fusion of 1 to 2 levels (2.96%, p < 0.0001) and 3 to 7 levels (4.12%, p < 0.0001). Patients with 3 to 7 levels of fusion had a higher rate of dislocation than patients with 1 to 2 levels of fusion (odds ratio (OR) = 1.60, p < 0.0001). When groups were matched for age and gender to the unfused cohort, patients with 1 to 2 levels of fusion had an OR of 1.93 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.42 to 2.32, p < 0.001), and those with 3 to 7 levels of fusion an OR of 2.77 (CI 2.04 to 4.80, p < 0.001) for dislocation. Conclusion Patients with a previous history of lumbar spinal fusion have a significantly higher rate of dislocation of their THA than age‐ and gender‐matched patients without a lumbar spinal fusion.

Total Hip Arthroplasty in the Spinal Deformity Population: Does Degree of Sagittal Deformity Affect Rates of Safe Zone Placement, Instability, or Revision?

BACKGROUND Changes in spinal alignment and pelvic tilt alter acetabular orientation in predictable ways, which may have implications on stability of total hip arthroplasty (THA). Patients with sagittal spinal deformity represent a subset of patients who may be at particularly high risk of THA instability because of postural compensation for abnormal spinal alignment. METHODS Using standing stereoradiography, we evaluated the spinopelvic parameters, acetabular cup anteversion, and inclination of 139 THAs in 107 patients with sagittal spinal deformity. Standing images were compared with supine pelvic radiographs to evaluate dynamic changes in acetabular cup position. Dislocation and revision rates were procured through retrospective chart review. The spinal parameters and acetabular cup positions among dislocators were compared with those who did not dislocate. RESULTS The rate of THA dislocation in this cohort was 8.0%, with a revision rate of 5.8% for instability. Patients who sustained dislocations had significantly higher spinopelvic tilt, T1-pelvic angle, and mismatch of lumbar lordosis and pelvic incidence. Among all patients, 78% had safe anteversion while supine, which decreased significantly to 58% when standing due to increases in spinopelvic tilt. Among dislocating THA, 80% had safe anteversion, 80% had safe inclination, and 60% had both parameters within the safe zone. CONCLUSION In this cohort, patients with THA and concomitant spinal deformity have a particularly high rate of THA instability despite having an acetabular cup position traditionally thought of as within acceptable alignment. This dislocation risk may be driven by the degree of spinal deformity and by spinopelvic compensation. Surgeons should anticipate potential instability after hip arthroplasty and adjust their surgical plan accordingly.

Thoracolumbar Realignment Surgery Results in Simultaneous Reciprocal Changes in Lower Extremities and Cervical Spine

Study Design. A retrospective, clinical, and radiographic single-center study. Objective. The aim of this study was to assess simultaneous cervical spine and lower extremity compensatory changes with changes in thoracolumbar spinal alignment. Summary of Background Data. Full-body stereoradiographic imaging allows better understanding of reciprocal changes in cervical and lower extremity alignment in the setting of thoracolumbar malalignment. Few studies describe the simultaneous effect of alignment correction on these mechanisms. Methods. Patients aged ≥18 years undergoing instrumented thoracolumbar fusion without previous cervical spine fusion, hip, knee, or ankle arthroplasty were included. Spinopelvic, lower extremity, and cervical alignment were assessed from full-body standing stereoradiographs using validated software. Patients were matched for pelvic incidence and stratified on the basis of baseline T1-pelvic angle (TPA) as: TPA-Low <14°, TPA-Moderate = 14° to 22°, and TPA-High >22°. Perioperative changes between baseline and first postoperative visit <6 months in lower extremity alignment (pelvic shift: P Shift, sacrofemoral angle: SFA, knee angle: KA, ankle angle: AA, global sagittal axis: GSA) and cervical alignment (C0-C2 angle, C2-slope, C2-C7 lordosis and C2-C7 SVA:cSVA) were correlated with change in magnitude of TPA and sagittal vertical axis (SVA) correction. Results. After matching, 87 patients were assessed. Increasing baseline TPA severity was associated with a progressive increase in all regional spinopelvic parameters except thoracic kyphosis, in addition to increased SFA, P Shift, KA, GSA, and C2-C7 lordosis. As TPA correction increased, there was a reciprocal reduction in SFA, KA, P Shift, GSA, and C2-C7 lordosis. Change in SVA correlated most with change in GSA (r = 0.886), P Shift (r = 0.601), KA (r = 0.534), and C2-C7 lordosis (r = 0.467). Change in TPA correlated with change in SFA (r = 0.372), while SVA did not. Conclusion. Patients with thoracolumbar malalignment exhibit compensatory changes in cervical spine and lower extremity simultaneously in the form of cervical hyperlordosis, pelvic shift, knee flexion, and pelvic retroversion. These compensatory mechanisms resolve reciprocally in a linear fashion following optimal surgical correction. Level of Evidence: 3

Prosthetic Dislocation and Revision After Primary Total Hip Arthroplasty in Lumbar Fusion Patients: A Propensity Score Matched-Pair Analysis

BACKGROUND Lumbar-pelvic fusion reduces the variation in pelvic tilt in functional situations by reducing lumbar spine flexibility, which is thought to be important in maintaining stability of a total hip arthroplasty (THA). We compared dislocation and revision rates for patients with lumbar fusion and subsequent THA to a matched comparison cohort with hip and spine degenerative changes undergoing only THA. METHODS We identified patients in New York State who underwent primary elective lumbar fusion for degenerative disc disease pathology and subsequent THA between January 2005 and December 2012. A propensity score match was performed to compare 934 patients with prior lumbar fusion to 934 patients with only THA according to age, gender, race, Deyo comorbidity score, year of surgery, and surgeon volume. Revision and dislocation rates were assessed at 3, 6, and 12 months post-THA. RESULTS At 12 months, patients with prior lumbar fusion had significantly increased rates of THA dislocation (control: 0.4%; fusion: 3.0%; P < .001) and revision (control: 0.9%; fusion: 3.9%; P < .001). At 12 months, fusion patients were 7.19 times more likely to dislocate their THA (P < .001) and 4.64 times more likely to undergo revision (P < .001). CONCLUSION Patients undergoing lumbar fusion and subsequent THA have significantly higher risks of dislocation and revision of their hip arthroplasty than a matched cohort of patients with similar hip and spine pathology but only undergoing THA. During preoperative consultation for patients with prior lumbar fusion, orthopedic surgeons must educate the patient and family about the increased risk of dislocation and revision.

Incidence of perioperative medical complications and mortality among elderly patients undergoing surgery for spinal deformity: analysis of 3519 patients

OBJECTIVE Using 2 complication-reporting methods, the authors investigated the incidence of major medical complications and mortality in elderly patients after surgery for adult spinal deformity (ASD) during a 2-year follow-up period. METHODS The authors queried a multicenter, prospective, surgeon-maintained database (SMD) to identify patients 65 years or older who underwent surgical correction of ASD from 2008 through 2014 and had a minimum 2 years of follow-up (n = 153). They also queried a Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services claims database (MCD) for patients 65 years or older who underwent fusion of 8 or more vertebral levels from 2005 through 2012 (n = 3366). They calculated cumulative rates of the following complications during the first 6 weeks after surgery: cerebrovascular accident, congestive heart failure, deep venous thrombosis, myocardial infarction, pneumonia, and pulmonary embolism. Significance was set at p < 0.05. RESULTS During the perioperative period, rates of major medical complications were 5.9% for pneumonia, 4.1% for deep venous thrombosis, 3.2% for pulmonary embolism, 2.1% for cerebrovascular accident, 1.8% for myocardial infarction, and 1.0% for congestive heart failure. Mortality rates were 0.9% at 6 weeks and 1.8% at 2 years. When comparing the SMD with the MCD, there were no significant differences in the perioperative rates of major medical complications except pneumonia. Furthermore, there were no significant intergroup differences in the mortality rates at 6 weeks or 2 years. The SMD provided greater detail with respect to deformity characteristics and surgical variables than the MCD. CONCLUSIONS The incidence of most major medical complications in the elderly after surgery for ASD was similar between the SMD and the MCD and ranged from 1% for congestive heart failure to 5.9% for pneumonia. These complications data can be valuable for preoperative patient counseling and informed consent.

Cervical disc replacement - emerging equivalency to anterior cervical discectomy and fusion.

PurposeCervical disc replacement has become an acceptable alternative to anterior cervical fusion for the surgical treatment of cervical spine spondylosis resulting in radiculopathy or myelopathy following anterior discectomy and decompression. This concise overview considers the current state of knowledge regarding the continued debate of the role of cervical disc replacement with an update in light of the latest clinical trial results.MethodsA literature review was performed identifying clinical trials pertaining to the use of cervical disc replacement compared to cervical discectomy and fusion. Single level disease and two level disease were considered. Outcome data from the major clinical trials was reviewed and salient points identified.ResultsWith lengthier follow-up data becoming available, the equivalence of CDR in appropriately selected cases is becoming clear. This is chiefly manifested by reduced re-operation rates and reduced incidence of adjacent level disease in those treated with arthroplasty.ConclusionCervical disc replacement shows emerging equivalence in outcomes compared to the gold standard anterior cervical discectomy and fusion. Further longer term results are anticipated to confirm this trend.

Radiological lumbar stenosis severity predicts worsening sagittal malalignment on full-body standing stereoradiographs

BACKGROUND CONTEXT Patients with degenerative lumbar stenosis (DLS) adopt a forward flexed posture in an attempt to decompress neural elements. The relationship between sagittal alignment and severity of lumbar stenosis has not previously been studied. PURPOSE We hypothesized that patients with increasing radiological severity of lumbar stenosis will exhibit worsening sagittal alignment. STUDY DESIGN This is a cross-sectional study. PATIENT SAMPLE Our sample consists of patients who have DLS. OUTCOME MEASURES Standing pelvic, regional, lower extremity and global sagittal alignment, and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) were the outcome measures. METHODS Patients with DLS were identified from a retrospective clinical database with corresponding full-body stereoradiographs. Exclusion criteria included coronal malalignment, prior spine surgery, spondylolisthesis>Grade 1, non-degenerative spinal pathology, or skeletal immaturity. Central stenosis severity was graded on axial T2-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) from L1-S1. Foraminal stenosis and supine lordosis was graded on sagittal T1-weighted images. Standing pelvic, regional, lower extremity, and global sagittal alignment were measured using validated software. The HRQoL measures were also analyzed in relation to severity of stenosis. RESULTS A total of 125 patients were identified with DLS on appropriate imaging. As central stenosis grade increased, patients displayed significantly increasing standing T1 pelvic angle, pelvic tilt, sagittal vertical axis, and pelvic incidence-lumbar lordosis (p<.05). No significant difference wasfound in pelvic incidence, supine lordosis, thoracic kyphosis, or T1 spinopelvic inclination between central stenosis groups. Despite similar supine lordosis between stenosis groups, patients with Grades 2 and 3 stenosis had less standing lordosis, suggesting antalgic posturing. Upper lumbar (L1-L3) stenosis predicted worse alignment than lower lumbar (L4-S1) stenosis. Increasing severity of foraminal stenosis was associated with reduced lumbar lordosis; however, no significant postural difference in lordosis, thoracolumbar, or lower extremity compensatory mechanisms were noted between foraminal stenosis groups. Stenosis grading did not predict worsening HRQoLs in central or foraminal stenosis. CONCLUSIONS Severity of central lumbar stenosis as graded on MRI correlates with severity of sagittal malalignment. These findings support theories of sagittal malalignment as a compensatory mechanism for central lumbar stenosis.

Differentiating Hip Pathology From Lumbar Spine Pathology: Key Points of Evaluation and Management.

The diagnosis and treatment of patients who have both hip and lumbar spine pathologies may be a challenge because overlapping symptoms may delay a correct diagnosis and appropriate treatment. Common complaints of patients who have both hip and lumbar spine pathologies include low back pain with associated buttock, groin, thigh, and, possibly, knee pain. A thorough patient history should be obtained and a complete physical examination should be performed in these patients to identify the primary source of pain. Plain and advanced imaging studies and diagnostic injections can be used to further delineate the primary pathology and guide the appropriate sequence of treatment. Both the surgeon and the patient should understand that, although one pathology is managed, the management of the other pathology may be necessary because of persistent pain. The recognition of both entities may help reduce the likelihood of misdiagnosis, and the management of both entities in the appropriate sequence may help reduce the likelihood of persistent symptoms.

The impact of obesity on compensatory mechanisms in response to progressive sagittal malalignment

BACKGROUND CONTEXT Obesitys impact on standing sagittal alignment remains poorly understood, especially with respect to the role of the lower limbs. Given energetic expenditure in standing, a complete understanding of compensation in obese patients with sagittal malalignment remains relevant. PURPOSE This study compares obese and non-obese patients with progressive sagittal malalignment for differences in recruitment of pelvic and lower-limb mechanisms. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING Single-center retrospective review. PATIENT SAMPLE A total of 554 patients (277 obese, 277 non-obese) were identified for analysis. OUTCOME MEASURES Upper body alignment parameters: sagittal vertical axis (SVA) and T1 spinopelvic inclination (T1SPi). Compensatory lower-limb mechanisms: pelvic translation (pelvic shift [PS]), knee (KA) and ankle (AA) flexion, hip extension (sacrofemoral angle [SFA]), and global sagittal angle (GSA). METHODS Inclusion criteria were patients ≥18 years who underwent full-body stereographic x-rays. Included patients were categorized as non-obese (N-Ob: body mass index [BMI]<30 kg/m2) or obese (Ob: BMI≥30 kg/m2). To control for potential confounders, groups were propensity score matched by age, gender, and baseline pelvic incidence (PI), and subsequently categorized by increasing spinopelvic (pelvic incidence minus lumbar lordosis [PI-LL]) mismatch: <10°, 10°-20°, >20°. Independent t tests and linear regression models compared sagittal (SVA, T1SPi) and lower limb (PS, KA, AA, SFA, GSA) parameters between obesity cohorts. RESULTS A total of 554 patients (277 Ob, 277 N-Ob) were included for analysis and were stratified to the following mismatch categories: <10°: n=367; 10°-20°: n=91; >20°: n=96. Obese patients had higher SVA, KA, PS, and GSA than N-Ob patients (p<.001 all). Low PI-LL mismatch Ob patients had greater SVA with lower SFA (142.22° vs. 156.66°, p=.032), higher KA (5.22° vs. 2.93°, p=.004), and higher PS (4.91 vs. -5.20 mm, p<.001) than N-Ob patients. With moderate PI-LL mismatch, Ob patients similarly demonstrated greater SVA, KA, and PS, combined with significantly lower PT (23.69° vs. 27.14°, p=.012). Obese patients of highest (>20°) PI-LL mismatch showed greatest forward malalignment (SVA, T1SPi) with significantly greater PS, and a concomitantly high GSA (12.86° vs. 9.67°, p=.005). Regression analysis for lower-limb compensation revealed that increasing BMI and PI-LL predicted KA (r2=0.234) and GSA (r2=0.563). CONCLUSIONS With progressive sagittal malalignment, obese patients differentially recruit lower extremity compensatory mechanisms, whereas non-obese patients preferentially recruit pelvic mechanisms. The ability to compensate for progressive sagittal malalignment with the pelvic retroversion is limited by obesity.