Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

A proposed classification system for guiding surgical strategy in cases of severe spinal deformity based on spinal cord function

  • Original Article
  • Published:
European Spine Journal Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

Spinal cord function classification systems are not useful for guiding surgery in patients with severe spinal deformities. The aim of this study is to propose a classification system for determining a surgical strategy that minimizes the risk of neurological dysfunction in patients with severe spinal deformities.

Methods

The records of 89 patients with severe spinal deformities treated with vertebral column reconstruction from 2008 to 2013 were retrospectively analyzed. Based on neurophysiological monitoring, magnetic resonance imaging, and neurological symptoms patients were categorized into three groups: group A, normal spinal cord, normal evoked potentials and no neurological symptoms; group B, spinal cord abnormalities and/or abnormal evoked potentials but no neurological symptoms; group C, neurological symptoms with or without spinal cord abnormalities/abnormal evoked potentials. Outcomes and complications were compared between the groups.

Results

A total of 89 patients (51 male, 38 female) were included with 47 (52.8 %), 16 (18.0 %), and 26 (29.2 %) patients in groups A, B and C, respectively, and a mean follow-up 34.5 months. There were no differences in age, gender, average preoperative scoliosis, and kyphosis among three groups, but there were differences with respect to the causes of severe spinal deformity and the corrective rate of scoliosis and kyphosis. Changes in intraoperative evoked potentials were different in these three types according to this new classification, and the recovery rates of changes in the three groups were 71.1, 50.0, and 14.1 %, respectively. Postoperative spinal cord injury was positively related to intraoperative changes of evoked potentials.

Conclusion

The classification system may be useful for guiding surgical decisions in patients with severe spinal deformities to minimize the risk of neurological complications.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Guille JT, Betz RR, Balsara RK, Mulcahey MJ, D’Andrea LP, Clements DH (2003) The feasibility, safety, and utility of vertebral wedge osteotomies for the fusionless treatment of paralytic scoliosis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 28:S266–S274

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Hui H, Tao HR, Jiang XF, Fan HB, Yan M, Luo ZJ (2012) Safety and efficacy of 1-stage surgical treatment of congenital spinal deformity associated with split spinal cord malformation. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 37:2104–2113

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Kim KT, Park KJ, Lee JH (2009) Osteotomy of the spine to correct spinal deformity. Asian Spine J 3:113–123

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Liu W, Zheng D, Cui S, Zhang C, Liu Y, Jia Y et al (2009) Characteristics of osseous septum of split cord malformation in patients presenting with scoliosis: a retrospective study of 48 cases. Pediatr Neurosurg 45:333–350

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Mehta VA, Gottfried ON, McGirt MJ, Gokaslan ZL, Ahn ES, Jallo GI (2011) Safety and efficacy of concurrent pediatric spinal cord untethering and deformity correction. J Spinal Disord Tech 24:401–405

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Wang G, Sun J, Jiang Z, Ciu X, Ciu J (2015) One stage correction surgery of scoliosis associated with syringomyelia: is it safe to leave untreated a syrinx without neurological symptom? J Spinal Disord Tech 28(5):E260–E264

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Singh K, Samartzis D, Vaccaro AR, Andersson GB, An HS, Heller JG (2006) Current concepts in the management of metastatic spinal disease. The role of minimally invasive approaches. J Bone Jt Surg Br 88-B:434–442

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Tator CH (2012) Neurologic examination: grading scales. In: Benzel EC (ed) The cervical spine, 5th edn. Wolters Kluwer/Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Philadelphia, pp 187–191

    Google Scholar 

  9. Suk SI, Chung ER, Kim JH, Kim SS, Lee JS, Choi WK (2005) Posterior vertebral column resection for severe rigid scoliosis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 30:1682–1687

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Lamartina C, Berjano P (2014) Classification of sagittal imbalance based on spinal alignment and compensatory mechanisms. Eur Spine J 23:1177–1189

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Cecchinato R, Berjano P, Aguirre MF, Lamartina C (2015) Asymmetrical pedicle subtraction osteotomy in the lumbar spine in combined coronal and sagittal imbalance. Eur Spine J 24(Suppl 1):S66–S71

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Lenke LG, Newton PO, Sucato DJ, Shufflebarger HL, Emans JB, Sponseller PD et al (2013) Complications after 147 consecutive vertebral column resections for severe pediatric spinal deformity. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 38:119–132

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Kokubun S (1995) Shortening spinal osteotomy for TCS in adults. Spine Spinal Cord 8(Suppl 12):5

    Google Scholar 

  14. Grande AW, Maher PC, Morgan CJ, Choutka O, Ling BC, Raderstorf TC et al (2006) Vertebral column subtraction osteotomy for recurrent tethered cord syndrome in adults: a cadaveric study. J Neurosurg Spine 4:478–484

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Safain MG, Burke SM, Riesenburger RI et al (2015) The effect of spinal osteotomies on spinal cord tension and dural buckling: a cadaveric study. J Neurosurg Spine 23(1):120–127

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Stecker MM (2012) A review of intraoperative monitoring for spinal surgery. Surg Neurol Int 3(Suppl S3):174–187

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Lenke LG, Sides BA, Koester LA, Hensley M, Blanke KM (2010) Vertebral column resection for the treatment of severe spinal deformity. Clin Orthop Relat Res 468:687–699

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. Thuet ED, Winscher JC, Padberg AM, Bridwell KH, Lenke LG, Dobbs MB et al (2010) Validity and reliability of intraoperative monitoring in pediatric spinal deformity surgery. A 23-year experience of 3436 surgical cases. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 35:1880–1886

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jun-lin Yang.

Ethics declarations

Funding

This work was supported by grants from Sun Yat-Sen University Clinical Research 5010 Program (No. 2012003). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Additional information

J. Yang and Z. Huang have contributed equally to this work.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Yang, Jl., Huang, Zf., Yin, Jq. et al. A proposed classification system for guiding surgical strategy in cases of severe spinal deformity based on spinal cord function. Eur Spine J 25, 1821–1829 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-015-4367-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-015-4367-2

Keywords

Navigation