• Spine · Sep 2021

    Does Matching Roussouly Spinal Shape and Improvement in SRS-Schwab Modifier Contribute to Improved Patient-reported Outcomes?

    • Peter G Passias, Katherine E Pierce, Tina Raman, Cole Bortz, Haddy Alas, Avery Brown, Waleed Ahmad, Sara Naessig, Oscar Krol, Lara Passfall, Nicholas A Kummer, Renaud Lafage, and Virginie Lafage.
    • Division of Spinal Surgery/Departments of Orthopedic and Neurosurgery, NYU Medical Center, NY Spine Institute, New York, NY.
    • Spine. 2021 Sep 15; 46 (18): 1258-1263.

    Study DesignRetrospective review.ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to evaluate outcomes of matching Roussouly and improving in Schwab modifier following adult spinal deformity (ASD) surgery.Summary Of Background DataThe Roussouly Classification system of sagittal spinal shape and the SRS-Schwab classification system have become important indicators of spine deformity. No previous studies have examined the outcomes of matching both Roussouly type and improving in Schwab modifiers postoperatively.MethodsSurgical ASD patients with available baseline (BL) and 1 year (1Y) radiographic data were isolated in the single-center spine database. Patients were classified by their "theoretical" and "current" Roussouly types as previously published. Patients were considered a "Match" if their theoretical and current Roussouly types were the same, or a "Mismatch" if the types differed. Patients were noted as improved if they were Roussouly "Mismatch" preoperatively, and "Match" at 1Y postop. Schwab modifiers at BL were categorized as follows: no deformity (0), moderate deformity (+), and severe deformity (++) for PT, SVA, and PI-LL. Improvement in SRS-Schwab was defined as a decrease in any modifier severity at 1Y.Results103 operative ASD patients (61.8 years, 63.1% female, 30 kg/m2) were included. At baseline, breakdown of "current" Roussouly type was: 28% Type 1, 25.3% Type 2, 32.0% Type 3, 14.7% Type 4. 65.3% of patients were classified as Roussouly "Mismatch" at BL. Breakdown of BL Schwab modifier severity: PT (+: 41.7%, ++: 49.5%), SVA (+: 20.3%, ++: 50%), PI-LL (+: 25.2%, ++: 46.6%). At 1 year postop, 19.2% of patients had Roussouly "Match". Analysis of Schwab modifiers showed that 12.6% improved in SVA, 42.7% in PI-LL, and 45.6% in PT. Count of patients who both had a Roussouly type "Match" at 1Y and improved in Schwab modifier severity: nine PT (8.7%), eight PI-LL (7.8%), and two SVA (1.9%). There were two patients (1.9%) who met their Roussouly type and improved in all three Schwab. 1Y matched Roussouly patients improved more in health-related quality of life scores (minimal clinically important difference [MCID] for Oswestry Disability Index [ODI], EuroQol-5D-3L [EQ5D], Visual Analogue Score Leg/Back Pain), compared to mismatched, but was not significant (P > 0.05). Match Roussouly and improvement in PT Schwab met MCID for EQ5D more (P = 0.050). Matched Roussouly and improvement in SVA Schwab met MCID for ODI more (P = 0.024).ConclusionPatients who both matched Roussouly sagittal spinal type and improved in SRS-Schwab modifiers had superior patient-reported outcomes. Utilizing both classification systems in surgical decision-making can optimize postop outcomes.Level of Evidence: 3.Copyright © 2021 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…