Search Results (4)

The management of adult spinal deformity (ASD) has evolved dramatically over the past century, transitioning from external bracing and in situ fusion to complex, technology-driven surgical interventions. This review traces the historical development of spinal deformity correction and highlights contemporary enabling technologies that are redefining the surgical landscape. Advances in stereoradiographic imaging now allow for precise, low-dose three-dimensional assessment of spinopelvic parameters and segmental bone density, facilitating individualized surgical planning. Robotic assistance and intraoperative navigation improve the accuracy and safety of instrumentation, while patient-specific rods and interbody implants enhance biomechanical conformity and alignment precision. Machine learning and predictive modeling tools have emerged as valuable adjuncts for risk stratification, surgical planning, and outcome forecasting. Minimally invasive deformity correction strategies, including anterior column realignment and circumferential minimally invasive surgery (cMIS), have demonstrated equivalent clinical and radiographic outcomes to traditional open surgery with reduced perioperative morbidity in select patients. Despite these advancements, complications such as proximal junctional kyphosis and failure remain prevalent. Adjunctive strategies—including ligamentous tethering, modified proximal fixation, and vertebral cement augmentation—offer promising preventive potential. Collectively, these innovations signal a paradigm shift toward precision spine surgery, characterized by data-informed decision-making, individualized construct design, and improved patient-centered outcomes in spinal deformity care. Full article

Background and Objectives: Although adult spinal deformity (ASD) surgery brought about improvement in the quality of life of patients, it is accompanied by high invasiveness and several complications. Specifically, mechanical complications of rod fracture, instrumentation failures, and pseudarthrosis are still unsolved issues. To better improve these problems, oblique lateral interbody fusion at L5/S1 (OLIF51) was introduced in 2015 at my institution. The objective of this study was to compare the clinical and radiologic outcomes of anterior–posterior combined surgery for ASD between the use of OLIF51 and transforaminal interbody fusion (TLIF) at L5/S1. Materials and Methods: A total of 117 ASD patients received anterior–posterior correction surgeries either with the use of OLIF51 (35 patients) or L5/S1 TLIF (82 patients). In both groups, L1–5 OLIF and minimally invasive posterior procedures of hybrid or circumferential MIS were employed. The sagittal and coronal spinal alignment and spino-pelvic parameters were recorded preoperatively and at follow-up. The quality-of-life parameters and visual analogue scale were evaluated, as well as surgical complications at follow-up. Results: The average follow-up period was thirty months (13–84). The number of average fused segments was eight (4–12). The operation time and estimated blood loss were significantly lower in OLIF51 than in TLIF. The PI-LL mismatch, LLL, L5/S1 segmental lordosis, and L5 coronal tilt were significantly better in OLIF51 than TLIF. The complication rate was statistically equivalent between the two groups. Conclusions: The introduction of OLIF51 for adult spine deformity surgery led to a decrease in operation time and estimated blood loss, as well as improvement in sagittal and coronal correction compared to TLIF. The circumferential MIS correction and fusion with OLIF51 serve as an effective surgical modality which can be applied to many cases of adult spinal deformity. Full article

This study aimed to devise measures and investigate their effect on coronal imbalance (CI) after circumferential minimally invasive correction surgery (CMIS) with lateral lumbar interbody fusion and percutaneous pedicle screw for adult spinal deformity (ASD). A total of 115 patients with ASD who underwent CMIS from the lower thoracic spine to the ilium were included. Patients were stratified based on the distance between the spinous process of the upper instrumented vertebra and central sacrum vertical line (UIV-CSVL) after the first intraoperative rod application into groups P (UIV-CSVL > 10 mm, n = 50) and G (UIV-CSVL < 10 mm, n = 65). Measures to correct postoperative CI introduced during surgery, preoperative and postoperative UIV-CSVL, and changes in UIV-CSVL after various measures (ΔUIV-CSVL) were investigated in group P. Rod rotation (RR), S2 alar-iliac screw distraction (SD), and kickstand-rod (KR) technique were performed in group P. Group P was further divided into group RR (n = 38), group SD (RR and SD) (n = 7), and group KR (RR and KR) (n = 5); the ΔUIV-CSVLs were 13.9 mm, 20.1 mm, and 24.4 mm in these three groups, respectively. Postoperative C7-CSVL < 10 mm was achieved in all three correction groups. In conclusion, our measures enabled sufficient correction of the UIV-CSVL and are useful for preventing CI after CMIS for ASD. Full article

This retrospective study aimed to evaluate the clinical outcomes of circumferential minimally invasive surgery (CMIS) using lateral lumbar interbody fusion (LLIF) and percutaneous pedicle screw (PPS) in adult spinal deformity (ASD) patients, and to clarify the conditions for achieving postoperative pelvic incidence-lumbar lordosis (PI-LL) < 10°. Demographics and other parameters of ASD patients who underwent CMIS and who were divided into groups G (achieved postoperative PI-LL < 10°) and P (PI-LL ≥ 10°) were compared. Of the 145 included ASD patients who underwent CMIS, the average fused level, bleeding volume, operative time, and number of intervertebral discs that underwent LLIF were 10.3 ± 0.5 segments, 723 ± 375 mL, 366 ± 70 min, and 4.0 segments, respectively. The rod material was titanium alloy in all the cases. The PI-LL significantly improved from 37.3 ± 17.9° to 1.2 ± 12.2° postoperatively. Pre- and postoperative PI, postoperative LL, preoperative PI-LL, PI-LL after LLIF, and postoperative PI-LL were significantly larger in group P. PI-LL after LLIF was identified as a significant risk factor of postoperative PI-LL < 10° by logistic regression, and the cut-off value on receiver operating characteristic curve analysis was 20°. Sufficient correction was achieved by CMIS. If PI-LL after LLIF was ≤20°, it was corrected to the ideal alignment by the PPS procedure. Full article