The Influence of Pelvic Incidence and Lumbar Lordosis Mismatch on Development of Symptomatic Adjacent Level Disease Following Single-Level Transforaminal Lumbar Interbody Fusion

BACKGROUND Annual incidence of symptomatic adjacent level disease (ALD) following lumbar fusion surgery ranges from 0.6% to 3.9% per year. Sagittal malalignment may contribute to the development of ALD. OBJECTIVE To describe the relationship between pelvic incidence-lumbar lordosis (PI-LL) mismatch and the development of symptomatic ALD requiring revision surgery following single-level transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for degenerative lumbar spondylosis and/or low-grade spondylolisthesis. METHODS All patients who underwent a single-level transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion at either L4/5 or L5/S1 between July 2006 and December 2012 were analyzed for pre- and postoperative spinopelvic parameters. Using univariate and logistic regression analysis, we compared the spinopelvic parameters of those patients who required revision surgery against those patients who did not develop symptomatic ALD. We calculated the predictive value of PI-LL mismatch. RESULTS One hundred fifty-nine patients met the inclusion criteria. The results noted that, for a 1° increase in PI-LL mismatch (preop and postop), the odds of developing ALD requiring surgery increased by 1.3 and 1.4 fold, respectively, which were statistically significant increases. Based on our analysis, a PI-LL mismatch of >11° had a positive predictive value of 75% for the development of symptomatic ALD requiring revision surgery. CONCLUSIONS A high PI-LL mismatch is strongly associated with the development of symptomatic ALD requiring revision lumbar spine surgery. The development of ALD may represent a global disease process as opposed to a focal condition. Spine surgeons may wish to consider assessment of spinopelvic parameters in the evaluation of degenerative lumbar spine pathology.

[1]  M. Rahm,et al.  Adjacent-segment degeneration after lumbar fusion with instrumentation: a retrospective study. , 1996, Journal of spinal disorders.

[2]  Z. Gokaslan,et al.  Implications of spinopelvic alignment for the spine surgeon. , 2012, Neurosurgery.

[3]  S Nakai,et al.  Long-term follow-up study of posterior lumbar interbody fusion. , 1999, Journal of spinal disorders.

[4]  Munish C. Gupta,et al.  Sagittal spinal pelvic alignment. , 2013, Neurosurgery clinics of North America.

[5]  Carolyn J. Sparrey,et al.  Etiology of lumbar lordosis and its pathophysiology: a review of the evolution of lumbar lordosis, and the mechanics and biology of lumbar degeneration. , 2014, Neurosurgical focus.

[6]  D. Brodke,et al.  Predicting the Risk of Adjacent Segment Pathology After Lumbar Fusion: A Systematic Review , 2012, Spine.

[7]  Jeffrey C. Wang,et al.  Adjacent segment degeneration in the lumbar spine. , 2004, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[8]  John R. Johnson,et al.  Sagittal alignment as a risk factor for adjacent level degeneration: a case-control study. , 2008, Orthopedics.

[9]  L. Lenke,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? , 2006, Spine.

[10]  D. Ahn,et al.  Survival and Prognostic Analysis of Adjacent Segments after Spinal Fusion , 2010, Clinics in orthopedic surgery.

[11]  Jeffrey C. Wang,et al.  Lumbar Clinical Adjacent Segment Pathology: Predilection for Proximal Levels , 2014, Spine.

[12]  T. Takebayashi,et al.  Adjacent segment stenosis after lumbar fusion requiring second operation , 2005, Journal of orthopaedic science : official journal of the Japanese Orthopaedic Association.

[13]  N. Langrana,et al.  Lumbosacral spinal fusion. A biomechanical study. , 1984, Spine.

[14]  K. Bridwell,et al.  The SRS Classification for Adult Spinal Deformity: Building on the King/Moe and Lenke Classification Systems , 2006, Spine.

[15]  J L Lewis,et al.  The effects of immobilization of long segments of the spine on the adjacent and distal facet force and lumbosacral motion. , 1993, Spine.

[16]  S Etebar,et al.  Risk factors for adjacent-segment failure following lumbar fixation with rigid instrumentation for degenerative instability. , 1999, Journal of neurosurgery.

[17]  J. Snedeker,et al.  Pelvic incidence–lumbar lordosis mismatch results in increased segmental joint loads in the unfused and fused lumbar spine , 2014, European Spine Journal.

[18]  Mari Smith,et al.  Incidence and prevalence of surgery at segments adjacent to a previous posterior lumbar arthrodesis. , 2011, The spine journal : official journal of the North American Spine Society.

[19]  M. K. Kim,et al.  The impact of sagittal balance on clinical results after posterior interbody fusion for patients with degenerative spondylolisthesis: A Pilot study , 2011, BMC musculoskeletal disorders.

[20]  Malhar N. Kumar,et al.  Correlation between sagittal plane changes and adjacent segment degeneration following lumbar spine fusion , 2001, European Spine Journal.

[21]  Kai-Ming G. Fu,et al.  Change in Classification Grade by the SRS-Schwab Adult Spinal Deformity Classification Predicts Impact on Health-Related Quality of Life Measures: Prospective Analysis of Operative and Nonoperative Treatment , 2013, Spine.

[22]  Oheneba Boachie-Adjei,et al.  Radiographical Spinopelvic Parameters and Disability in the Setting of Adult Spinal Deformity: A Prospective Multicenter Analysis , 2013, Spine.

[23]  John H. Evans,et al.  Effects of Short Anterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion on Biomechanics of Neighboring Unfused Segments , 1996, Spine.

[24]  William Horton,et al.  The Impact of Positive Sagittal Balance in Adult Spinal Deformity , 2005, Spine.