Optimal Pelvic Incidence Minus Lumbar Lordosis Mismatch after Long Posterior Instrumentation and Fusion for Adult Degenerative Scoliosis
Objective To evaluate the influence of Scoliosis Research Society (SRS)‐Schwab sagittal modifiers of pelvic incidence minus lumbar lordosis mismatch (PI‐LL) on clinical outcomes for adult degenerative scoliosis (ADS) after long posterior instrumentation and fusion. Methods This was a single‐institut...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Orthopaedic surgery 2017-08, Vol.9 (3), p.304-310 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext bestellen |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 310 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 3 |
| container_start_page | 304 |
| container_title | Orthopaedic surgery |
| container_volume | 9 |
| creator | Zhang, Hao‐cong Zhang, Zi‐fang Wang, Zhao‐han Cheng, Jun‐yao Wu, Yun‐chang Fan, Yi‐ming Wang, Tian‐hao Wang, Zheng |
| description | Objective
To evaluate the influence of Scoliosis Research Society (SRS)‐Schwab sagittal modifiers of pelvic incidence minus lumbar lordosis mismatch (PI‐LL) on clinical outcomes for adult degenerative scoliosis (ADS) after long posterior instrumentation and fusion.
Methods
This was a single‐institute, retrospective study. From 2012 to 2014, 44 patients with ADS who underwent posterior instrumentation and fusion treatment were reviewed. Radiological evaluations were investigated by standing whole spine (posteroanterior and lateral views) X‐ray and all radiological measurements, including Cobb’s angle, LL, PI, and the grading of vertebral rotation, were performed by two experienced surgeons who were blind to the operations. The patients were divided into three groups based on postoperative PI‐LL and the classification of the SRS‐Schwab: 0 grade PI‐LL (20°, n = 12). The clinical outcomes were assessed according to Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) score, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Visual Analog Scale (VAS), Lumbar Stiffness Disability Index (LSDI), and complications. Other characteristic data of patients were also collected, including intraoperative blood loss, operative time, length of hospital stay, complications, number of fusion levels, and number of decompressions.
Results
The mean operative time, blood loss, and hospital stay were 284.5 ± 30.2 min, 1040.5 ± 1207.6 mL, and 14.5 ± 1.9 day. At the last follow‐up (2.6 ± 0.6 years), the radiological and functional parameters, except the grading of vertebral rotation, were all significantly improved in comparison with preoperative results (P |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1111/os.12343 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_24P</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_6584469</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>1943043017</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4383-f6209705fea1624648fd39f3c5f699074e51ca32b98ac68da1d57e9686e31bf33</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kc9q3DAQxkVpaNJtoU9QBL304kSybP25FELatIEtG0h7Flp5tFGwpa1kb8kb5LEjs-mSHCoE-pj5zadhBqEPlJzScs5iPqU1a9grdEJFKyohOX190C07Rm9zviOEKybEG3RcS8WJpPwEPay2ox9Mj6-h33mLr4L1HQQL-KcPU8bLaVibhJcxdTH7XKJ5MKO9xcaNMMfDBl_HXLSPqVTnMU0DhNGMPgZsQocvpzxLV9Ln3dSP-CtsIEAqxA7wjY29n53foSNn-gzvn94F-n357dfFj2q5-n51cb6sbMMkqxyviRKkdWAorxveSNcx5ZhtHVeKiAZaag2r10oay2VnaNcKUFxyYHTtGFugL3vf7bQeoLOl12R6vU1lCuleR-P1y0zwt3oTd5q3smnKABfo05NBin8myKO-i1MKpWdNVcNIuVQU6vOesinmnMAdfqBEzzvTsfDzzgr68XlHB_DfkgpQ7YG_vof7_xrp1c3e8BHjNKLA</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1943043017</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Optimal Pelvic Incidence Minus Lumbar Lordosis Mismatch after Long Posterior Instrumentation and Fusion for Adult Degenerative Scoliosis</title><source>Wiley-Blackwell Open Access Titles</source><creator>Zhang, Hao‐cong ; Zhang, Zi‐fang ; Wang, Zhao‐han ; Cheng, Jun‐yao ; Wu, Yun‐chang ; Fan, Yi‐ming ; Wang, Tian‐hao ; Wang, Zheng</creator><creatorcontrib>Zhang, Hao‐cong ; Zhang, Zi‐fang ; Wang, Zhao‐han ; Cheng, Jun‐yao ; Wu, Yun‐chang ; Fan, Yi‐ming ; Wang, Tian‐hao ; Wang, Zheng</creatorcontrib><description>Objective
To evaluate the influence of Scoliosis Research Society (SRS)‐Schwab sagittal modifiers of pelvic incidence minus lumbar lordosis mismatch (PI‐LL) on clinical outcomes for adult degenerative scoliosis (ADS) after long posterior instrumentation and fusion.
Methods
This was a single‐institute, retrospective study. From 2012 to 2014, 44 patients with ADS who underwent posterior instrumentation and fusion treatment were reviewed. Radiological evaluations were investigated by standing whole spine (posteroanterior and lateral views) X‐ray and all radiological measurements, including Cobb’s angle, LL, PI, and the grading of vertebral rotation, were performed by two experienced surgeons who were blind to the operations. The patients were divided into three groups based on postoperative PI‐LL and the classification of the SRS‐Schwab: 0 grade PI‐LL (<10°, n = 13); + grade PI‐LL (10°–20°, n = 19); and ++ grade PI‐LL (>20°, n = 12). The clinical outcomes were assessed according to Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) score, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Visual Analog Scale (VAS), Lumbar Stiffness Disability Index (LSDI), and complications. Other characteristic data of patients were also collected, including intraoperative blood loss, operative time, length of hospital stay, complications, number of fusion levels, and number of decompressions.
Results
The mean operative time, blood loss, and hospital stay were 284.5 ± 30.2 min, 1040.5 ± 1207.6 mL, and 14.5 ± 1.9 day. At the last follow‐up (2.6 ± 0.6 years), the radiological and functional parameters, except the grading of vertebral rotation, were all significantly improved in comparison with preoperative results (P < 0.05), but it was obvious that an ideal PI‐LL (≤10°) was not achieved in some patients. Significant differences were only observed among the three groups in the ODI and LSDI. Patients with + grade PI‐LL seemed to have the best surgical outcome compared to those with 0 and ++ grade PI‐LL, with the lowest ODI score (+ grade vs 0 grade, 17.3 ± 4.9 vs 26.0 ± 5.4; + grade vs ++ grade, 17.3 ± 4.9 vs 32.4 ± 7.3; P < 0.05) and lower LSDI (+ grade vs 0 grade, 1.6 ± 1.0 vs 3.5 ± 0.5, P < 0.05; + grade vs ++ grade, 1.6 ± 1.0 vs 0.6 ± 0.5, P > 0.05). A Pearson correlation analysis further demonstrated that LSDI was negatively associated with PI‐LL. Furthermore, the incidence rate of postoperative complications was lower in patients with + grade PI‐LL (1/19, 5.26%) than that in patients with 0 (2/13, 15.4%) and ++ grade PI‐LL (3/12, 25%).
Conclusion
Our present study suggest that the ideal PI‐LL may be between 10° and 20° in ADS patients after long posterior instrumentation and fusion.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1757-7853</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1757-7861</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/os.12343</identifier><identifier>PMID: 28960816</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Melbourne: John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd</publisher><subject>Aged ; Basic Research ; Blood Loss, Surgical ; Clinical outcomes ; Degenerative scoliosis ; Disability Evaluation ; Female ; Humans ; Lordosis - diagnostic imaging ; Lordosis - pathology ; Lumbar lordosis ; Lumbar Vertebrae - diagnostic imaging ; Lumbar Vertebrae - pathology ; Lumbar Vertebrae - surgery ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Pelvic Bones - diagnostic imaging ; Pelvic Bones - pathology ; Pelvic incidence ; Radiography ; Retrospective Studies ; Sagittal balance ; Scoliosis ; Scoliosis - diagnostic imaging ; Scoliosis - pathology ; Scoliosis - surgery ; Spinal Fusion - adverse effects ; Spinal Fusion - methods ; SRS‐Schwab classification ; Thoracic Vertebrae - diagnostic imaging ; Thoracic Vertebrae - surgery ; Treatment Outcome</subject><ispartof>Orthopaedic surgery, 2017-08, Vol.9 (3), p.304-310</ispartof><rights>2017 Chinese Orthopaedic Association and John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd</rights><rights>2017 Chinese Orthopaedic Association and John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4383-f6209705fea1624648fd39f3c5f699074e51ca32b98ac68da1d57e9686e31bf33</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4383-f6209705fea1624648fd39f3c5f699074e51ca32b98ac68da1d57e9686e31bf33</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6584469/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6584469/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,727,780,784,885,1417,11562,27924,27925,45574,45575,46052,46476,53791,53793</link.rule.ids><linktorsrc>$$Uhttps://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111%2Fos.12343$$EView_record_in_Wiley-Blackwell$$FView_record_in_$$GWiley-Blackwell</linktorsrc><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28960816$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Zhang, Hao‐cong</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zhang, Zi‐fang</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wang, Zhao‐han</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cheng, Jun‐yao</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wu, Yun‐chang</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fan, Yi‐ming</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wang, Tian‐hao</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wang, Zheng</creatorcontrib><title>Optimal Pelvic Incidence Minus Lumbar Lordosis Mismatch after Long Posterior Instrumentation and Fusion for Adult Degenerative Scoliosis</title><title>Orthopaedic surgery</title><addtitle>Orthop Surg</addtitle><description>Objective
To evaluate the influence of Scoliosis Research Society (SRS)‐Schwab sagittal modifiers of pelvic incidence minus lumbar lordosis mismatch (PI‐LL) on clinical outcomes for adult degenerative scoliosis (ADS) after long posterior instrumentation and fusion.
Methods
This was a single‐institute, retrospective study. From 2012 to 2014, 44 patients with ADS who underwent posterior instrumentation and fusion treatment were reviewed. Radiological evaluations were investigated by standing whole spine (posteroanterior and lateral views) X‐ray and all radiological measurements, including Cobb’s angle, LL, PI, and the grading of vertebral rotation, were performed by two experienced surgeons who were blind to the operations. The patients were divided into three groups based on postoperative PI‐LL and the classification of the SRS‐Schwab: 0 grade PI‐LL (<10°, n = 13); + grade PI‐LL (10°–20°, n = 19); and ++ grade PI‐LL (>20°, n = 12). The clinical outcomes were assessed according to Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) score, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Visual Analog Scale (VAS), Lumbar Stiffness Disability Index (LSDI), and complications. Other characteristic data of patients were also collected, including intraoperative blood loss, operative time, length of hospital stay, complications, number of fusion levels, and number of decompressions.
Results
The mean operative time, blood loss, and hospital stay were 284.5 ± 30.2 min, 1040.5 ± 1207.6 mL, and 14.5 ± 1.9 day. At the last follow‐up (2.6 ± 0.6 years), the radiological and functional parameters, except the grading of vertebral rotation, were all significantly improved in comparison with preoperative results (P < 0.05), but it was obvious that an ideal PI‐LL (≤10°) was not achieved in some patients. Significant differences were only observed among the three groups in the ODI and LSDI. Patients with + grade PI‐LL seemed to have the best surgical outcome compared to those with 0 and ++ grade PI‐LL, with the lowest ODI score (+ grade vs 0 grade, 17.3 ± 4.9 vs 26.0 ± 5.4; + grade vs ++ grade, 17.3 ± 4.9 vs 32.4 ± 7.3; P < 0.05) and lower LSDI (+ grade vs 0 grade, 1.6 ± 1.0 vs 3.5 ± 0.5, P < 0.05; + grade vs ++ grade, 1.6 ± 1.0 vs 0.6 ± 0.5, P > 0.05). A Pearson correlation analysis further demonstrated that LSDI was negatively associated with PI‐LL. Furthermore, the incidence rate of postoperative complications was lower in patients with + grade PI‐LL (1/19, 5.26%) than that in patients with 0 (2/13, 15.4%) and ++ grade PI‐LL (3/12, 25%).
Conclusion
Our present study suggest that the ideal PI‐LL may be between 10° and 20° in ADS patients after long posterior instrumentation and fusion.</description><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Basic Research</subject><subject>Blood Loss, Surgical</subject><subject>Clinical outcomes</subject><subject>Degenerative scoliosis</subject><subject>Disability Evaluation</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Lordosis - diagnostic imaging</subject><subject>Lordosis - pathology</subject><subject>Lumbar lordosis</subject><subject>Lumbar Vertebrae - diagnostic imaging</subject><subject>Lumbar Vertebrae - pathology</subject><subject>Lumbar Vertebrae - surgery</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Pelvic Bones - diagnostic imaging</subject><subject>Pelvic Bones - pathology</subject><subject>Pelvic incidence</subject><subject>Radiography</subject><subject>Retrospective Studies</subject><subject>Sagittal balance</subject><subject>Scoliosis</subject><subject>Scoliosis - diagnostic imaging</subject><subject>Scoliosis - pathology</subject><subject>Scoliosis - surgery</subject><subject>Spinal Fusion - adverse effects</subject><subject>Spinal Fusion - methods</subject><subject>SRS‐Schwab classification</subject><subject>Thoracic Vertebrae - diagnostic imaging</subject><subject>Thoracic Vertebrae - surgery</subject><subject>Treatment Outcome</subject><issn>1757-7853</issn><issn>1757-7861</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2017</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kc9q3DAQxkVpaNJtoU9QBL304kSybP25FELatIEtG0h7Flp5tFGwpa1kb8kb5LEjs-mSHCoE-pj5zadhBqEPlJzScs5iPqU1a9grdEJFKyohOX190C07Rm9zviOEKybEG3RcS8WJpPwEPay2ox9Mj6-h33mLr4L1HQQL-KcPU8bLaVibhJcxdTH7XKJ5MKO9xcaNMMfDBl_HXLSPqVTnMU0DhNGMPgZsQocvpzxLV9Ln3dSP-CtsIEAqxA7wjY29n53foSNn-gzvn94F-n357dfFj2q5-n51cb6sbMMkqxyviRKkdWAorxveSNcx5ZhtHVeKiAZaag2r10oay2VnaNcKUFxyYHTtGFugL3vf7bQeoLOl12R6vU1lCuleR-P1y0zwt3oTd5q3smnKABfo05NBin8myKO-i1MKpWdNVcNIuVQU6vOesinmnMAdfqBEzzvTsfDzzgr68XlHB_DfkgpQ7YG_vof7_xrp1c3e8BHjNKLA</recordid><startdate>201708</startdate><enddate>201708</enddate><creator>Zhang, Hao‐cong</creator><creator>Zhang, Zi‐fang</creator><creator>Wang, Zhao‐han</creator><creator>Cheng, Jun‐yao</creator><creator>Wu, Yun‐chang</creator><creator>Fan, Yi‐ming</creator><creator>Wang, Tian‐hao</creator><creator>Wang, Zheng</creator><general>John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd</general><general>John Wiley & Sons, Inc</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>5PM</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201708</creationdate><title>Optimal Pelvic Incidence Minus Lumbar Lordosis Mismatch after Long Posterior Instrumentation and Fusion for Adult Degenerative Scoliosis</title><author>Zhang, Hao‐cong ; Zhang, Zi‐fang ; Wang, Zhao‐han ; Cheng, Jun‐yao ; Wu, Yun‐chang ; Fan, Yi‐ming ; Wang, Tian‐hao ; Wang, Zheng</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4383-f6209705fea1624648fd39f3c5f699074e51ca32b98ac68da1d57e9686e31bf33</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2017</creationdate><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Basic Research</topic><topic>Blood Loss, Surgical</topic><topic>Clinical outcomes</topic><topic>Degenerative scoliosis</topic><topic>Disability Evaluation</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Lordosis - diagnostic imaging</topic><topic>Lordosis - pathology</topic><topic>Lumbar lordosis</topic><topic>Lumbar Vertebrae - diagnostic imaging</topic><topic>Lumbar Vertebrae - pathology</topic><topic>Lumbar Vertebrae - surgery</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Pelvic Bones - diagnostic imaging</topic><topic>Pelvic Bones - pathology</topic><topic>Pelvic incidence</topic><topic>Radiography</topic><topic>Retrospective Studies</topic><topic>Sagittal balance</topic><topic>Scoliosis</topic><topic>Scoliosis - diagnostic imaging</topic><topic>Scoliosis - pathology</topic><topic>Scoliosis - surgery</topic><topic>Spinal Fusion - adverse effects</topic><topic>Spinal Fusion - methods</topic><topic>SRS‐Schwab classification</topic><topic>Thoracic Vertebrae - diagnostic imaging</topic><topic>Thoracic Vertebrae - surgery</topic><topic>Treatment Outcome</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Zhang, Hao‐cong</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zhang, Zi‐fang</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wang, Zhao‐han</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cheng, Jun‐yao</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wu, Yun‐chang</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fan, Yi‐ming</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wang, Tian‐hao</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wang, Zheng</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Orthopaedic surgery</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext_linktorsrc</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Zhang, Hao‐cong</au><au>Zhang, Zi‐fang</au><au>Wang, Zhao‐han</au><au>Cheng, Jun‐yao</au><au>Wu, Yun‐chang</au><au>Fan, Yi‐ming</au><au>Wang, Tian‐hao</au><au>Wang, Zheng</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Optimal Pelvic Incidence Minus Lumbar Lordosis Mismatch after Long Posterior Instrumentation and Fusion for Adult Degenerative Scoliosis</atitle><jtitle>Orthopaedic surgery</jtitle><addtitle>Orthop Surg</addtitle><date>2017-08</date><risdate>2017</risdate><volume>9</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>304</spage><epage>310</epage><pages>304-310</pages><issn>1757-7853</issn><eissn>1757-7861</eissn><abstract>Objective
To evaluate the influence of Scoliosis Research Society (SRS)‐Schwab sagittal modifiers of pelvic incidence minus lumbar lordosis mismatch (PI‐LL) on clinical outcomes for adult degenerative scoliosis (ADS) after long posterior instrumentation and fusion.
Methods
This was a single‐institute, retrospective study. From 2012 to 2014, 44 patients with ADS who underwent posterior instrumentation and fusion treatment were reviewed. Radiological evaluations were investigated by standing whole spine (posteroanterior and lateral views) X‐ray and all radiological measurements, including Cobb’s angle, LL, PI, and the grading of vertebral rotation, were performed by two experienced surgeons who were blind to the operations. The patients were divided into three groups based on postoperative PI‐LL and the classification of the SRS‐Schwab: 0 grade PI‐LL (<10°, n = 13); + grade PI‐LL (10°–20°, n = 19); and ++ grade PI‐LL (>20°, n = 12). The clinical outcomes were assessed according to Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) score, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Visual Analog Scale (VAS), Lumbar Stiffness Disability Index (LSDI), and complications. Other characteristic data of patients were also collected, including intraoperative blood loss, operative time, length of hospital stay, complications, number of fusion levels, and number of decompressions.
Results
The mean operative time, blood loss, and hospital stay were 284.5 ± 30.2 min, 1040.5 ± 1207.6 mL, and 14.5 ± 1.9 day. At the last follow‐up (2.6 ± 0.6 years), the radiological and functional parameters, except the grading of vertebral rotation, were all significantly improved in comparison with preoperative results (P < 0.05), but it was obvious that an ideal PI‐LL (≤10°) was not achieved in some patients. Significant differences were only observed among the three groups in the ODI and LSDI. Patients with + grade PI‐LL seemed to have the best surgical outcome compared to those with 0 and ++ grade PI‐LL, with the lowest ODI score (+ grade vs 0 grade, 17.3 ± 4.9 vs 26.0 ± 5.4; + grade vs ++ grade, 17.3 ± 4.9 vs 32.4 ± 7.3; P < 0.05) and lower LSDI (+ grade vs 0 grade, 1.6 ± 1.0 vs 3.5 ± 0.5, P < 0.05; + grade vs ++ grade, 1.6 ± 1.0 vs 0.6 ± 0.5, P > 0.05). A Pearson correlation analysis further demonstrated that LSDI was negatively associated with PI‐LL. Furthermore, the incidence rate of postoperative complications was lower in patients with + grade PI‐LL (1/19, 5.26%) than that in patients with 0 (2/13, 15.4%) and ++ grade PI‐LL (3/12, 25%).
Conclusion
Our present study suggest that the ideal PI‐LL may be between 10° and 20° in ADS patients after long posterior instrumentation and fusion.</abstract><cop>Melbourne</cop><pub>John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd</pub><pmid>28960816</pmid><doi>10.1111/os.12343</doi><tpages>7</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext_linktorsrc |
| identifier | ISSN: 1757-7853 |
| ispartof | Orthopaedic surgery, 2017-08, Vol.9 (3), p.304-310 |
| issn | 1757-7853 1757-7861 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_6584469 |
| source | Wiley-Blackwell Open Access Titles |
| subjects | Aged Basic Research Blood Loss, Surgical Clinical outcomes Degenerative scoliosis Disability Evaluation Female Humans Lordosis - diagnostic imaging Lordosis - pathology Lumbar lordosis Lumbar Vertebrae - diagnostic imaging Lumbar Vertebrae - pathology Lumbar Vertebrae - surgery Male Middle Aged Pelvic Bones - diagnostic imaging Pelvic Bones - pathology Pelvic incidence Radiography Retrospective Studies Sagittal balance Scoliosis Scoliosis - diagnostic imaging Scoliosis - pathology Scoliosis - surgery Spinal Fusion - adverse effects Spinal Fusion - methods SRS‐Schwab classification Thoracic Vertebrae - diagnostic imaging Thoracic Vertebrae - surgery Treatment Outcome |
| title | Optimal Pelvic Incidence Minus Lumbar Lordosis Mismatch after Long Posterior Instrumentation and Fusion for Adult Degenerative Scoliosis |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-06T11%3A14%3A56IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_24P&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Optimal%20Pelvic%20Incidence%20Minus%20Lumbar%20Lordosis%20Mismatch%20after%20Long%20Posterior%20Instrumentation%20and%20Fusion%20for%20Adult%20Degenerative%20Scoliosis&rft.jtitle=Orthopaedic%20surgery&rft.au=Zhang,%20Hao%E2%80%90cong&rft.date=2017-08&rft.volume=9&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=304&rft.epage=310&rft.pages=304-310&rft.issn=1757-7853&rft.eissn=1757-7861&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/os.12343&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_24P%3E1943043017%3C/proquest_24P%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1943043017&rft_id=info:pmid/28960816&rfr_iscdi=true |