Abstract
BackgroundThe presence of bridging syndesmophytes (BS) in spinal osteotomy region serves traditionally as one critical determinant for selection of osteotomy techniques. While nowadays the proportion of kyphotic ankylosing spondylitis (AS) patients receiving pedicle subtraction osteotomy (PSO) with yet mobile neighboring disc has seen a substantial increase. Literatures investigating the clinical relevance of the presence of BS on kyphosis correction and maintenance following PSO are scarce.MethodsA total of 71 thoracolumbar kyphotic AS patients treated with single-level PSO at our hospital between September 2010 and August 2014 were retrospectively reviewed, 32 of whom were stratified into the BS group (BG). The operative corrections of multiple spino-pelvic sagittal parameters were assessed. Comparison of the contribution of adjacent disc wedging to total correction per PSO segment was made between the BS and non-BS groups (NBG). The correction loss were also evaluated and compared with a minimum 2-year follow-up.ResultsA significantly younger age (30.97 ± 8.28 vs. 40.31 ± 8.44 yrs., p < 0.001), smaller pelvic incidence (PI) (43.03 ± 10.60 vs. 49.36 ± 9.75°, p = 0.011), greater wedging index of osteotomized vertebra (1.17 ± 0.16 vs. 1.09 ± 0.08, p = 0.011) and larger local kyphosis (19.59 ± 10.84 vs. 13.56 ± 8.50°, p = 0.013) was observed in NBG preoperatively. Patients in BG and NBG accomplished comparable amount of kyphosis correction per PSO segment (40.22 ± 7.09 vs. 43.85 ± 8.71°, p = 0.062). However, the contribution of adjacent disc wedging to total correction per PSO was significantly larger in NBG [8.10 ± 6.19 (18.5%) vs. 1.09 ± 2.88° (2.7%), p < 0.001]. By ultimate follow-up, the global kyphosis (18.26 ± 10.97 vs. 21.51 ± 10.89°, p < 0.05) and thoracic kyphosis (37.95 ± 11.87 vs. 42.87 ± 11.56°, p < 0.05) deteriorated significantly in the NBG but not BG, so was further pelvic retroversion as represented by increased pelvic tilt (19.46 ± 8.13 vs. 23.44 ± 8.19°, p < 0.05) and decreased sacral slope (23.02 ± 9.12 vs. 18.62 ± 10.10°, p < 0.05). Loss of corrections concerning contribution of adjacent disc wedging was also larger in NBG (1.41 ± 3.27 vs. 0.22 ± 1.49°, p < 0.05).ConclusionsOur study might suggest that the evaluation and treatment methods of kyphotic AS patients needed to be fine-tuned with appropriate subgrouping by the presence of syndesmophytes with bamboo sign as they were potentially distinct groups with different PI, contributor of lordosing capability and prognosis that might require separate analysis.
Highlights
The presence of bridging syndesmophytes (BS) in spinal osteotomy region serves traditionally as one critical determinant for selection of osteotomy techniques
The contribution of adjacent disc wedging to total correction per pedicle subtraction osteotomy (PSO) was significantly larger in non-BS groups (NBG) [8.10 ± 6.19 (18.5%) vs. 1.09 ± 2.88° (2.7%), p < 0.001]
Loss of corrections concerning contribution of adjacent disc wedging was larger in NBG (1.41 ± 3.27 vs. 0.22 ± 1.49°, p < 0.05)
Summary
The presence of bridging syndesmophytes (BS) in spinal osteotomy region serves traditionally as one critical determinant for selection of osteotomy techniques. The key difference lies in that CWO is a shorting osteotomy utilizing the anterior cortex as the pivot, while for COWO, the middle column acts as the hinge, and opening and lengthening of the anterior column results in extra kyphosis correction [1, 9]. Sometimes these modified PSO procedures are beneficial for eliminating the necessity of performing additional osteotomy, and are favored to serve as a solution for the gray zone between single and two-level PSO
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
