Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Study Design

Single center, retrospective cohort study.

Objectives

Little is known about the surgical outcomes and quality of life in patients with C2-sacrum posterior spinal fusion (PSF). Though it is thought to be a “final” construct, it remains unknown how patients fare postoperatively. We sought to evaluate the surgical outcomes and quality of life of patients after C2-sacrum PSF.

Methods

Consecutive patients undergoing C2-Sacrum PSF from 2015-2020 by 4 surgeons at a single institution were included. The study time period for each patient began after their index operation that led to the C2-sacrum fusion. Dates of surgery, complications, reoperations, patient reported outcomes (PROs) including EuroQol 5 Dimensions (EQ-5D), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), Scoliosis Research Society (SRS) questionnaires, and activities of daily living (ADL) questions were collected and analyzed. Descriptive statistics, paired t-tests, student t-tests, and linear regression were used.

Results

Of the 23 patients who underwent C2-sacrum PSF, 6 patients (26%) required a total of 10 reoperations after a mean of 1.5 years (range 0-4 years) after C2-sacrum PSF. Five reoperations were for mechanical failure; 3 for wound complications/infection; and 2 for instrumentation and spinous process prominence. PROs were collected on 18 patients with mean follow-up of 2.4 years (range .5-4.5) after their C2-sacrum PSF. At 6-months, both SRS-22 and ODI scores improved significantly after C2-sacrum PSF (SRS: 57.5 to 76.3, P = .0014; ODI: 47.0 to 31.7, P = .013). Similarly, at a mean 2.4 years postoperatively, mean ODI improved significantly (47.0 to 30.4, P = .0032). Six patients (33%) had minimal symptoms (ODI <20). The median postoperative EQ-5D score was .74 (range .19 to 1.0), which compares favorably to patients with hip/knee osteoarthritis (EQ-5D .63) and diabetes mellitus (DM) (EQ-5D .69) and hypertension (HTN). In terms of activities of daily living (ADL), 10 patients (56%) exercised regularly—a mean 4.5 days/week. 11 (61%) could do light aerobic activity (e.g. stationary bike). 10 (55%) were able to play with children/grandchildren as desired. Eight patients (44%) hiked, and 2 (11%) drove independently. 11 (61%) could tolerate short air-travel comfortably. Of the 17 patients who could toilet and perform basic hygiene preoperatively, 16 (94%) were able to do so postoperatively.

Conclusion

Though C2-sacrum PSF is thought to be a “final” construct, approximately 1 in 4 patients require subsequent operations. However, C2-sacrum PSF patients had a significant improvement in SRS and ODI scores by 6 months postop. Over 60% of patients were regularly performing light aerobic activity 2 years after their C2-sacrum PSF. EQ-5D suggests that this population fares better than those with degenerative hip/knee arthritis and similarly to those with common chronic conditions like DM and HTN.

Keywords

fusion reoperation activities of daily living patient reported outcomes outcomes PROs sacrum C2-sacrum quality of life surgical outcomes

Introduction

Patients with adult spinal deformity (ASD) may require extensive instrumented fusions from C2 to sacrum in cases of cervical degenerative disorders and postoperative junctional failures.^1,2 With all but 2 spinal motion segments fused, patients with a C2-sacrum posterior spinal fusion (PSF) experience drastic changes in function. Few studies have examined the postoperative courses of patients who required cervical-pelvic fusions, and patient reported outcomes (PROs) have been largely unreported in this population.^3-5 One particular study assessing upper-cervical fusions to the sacrum reported reoperation in over half of patients; however, significant improvement was seen in Scoliosis Research Society-22r questionnaire (SRS-22r).²

In comparison to robust quality of life data in patients undergoing spinal degenerative surgery, upper thoracic to sacrum deformity correction, and even three-column osteotomies, long term outcomes and quality of life metrics in patients with C2-sacrum PSF are sparse. Understanding quality of life measured through PROs, such as ODI, SRS, Japanese Orthopaedic Association Back Pain Evaluation Questionnaire (JOABPEQ), EuroQol-5 Dimensions questionnaire (EQ-5D), and visual analog scale (VAS) scores, helps surgeons and patients better understand postoperative functioning.^6-12 One prior study has even directly compared the health impact of adult cervical spine deformity to that of chronic disease states such as blindness and emphysema, using EQ-5D scores.¹³

An in-depth understanding of the quality of life of patients living with C2-sacrum PSF – what activities they can and cannot do – is currently lacking. Following this extensive fusion, it is unknown if patients require future surgery, can partake in hobbies, or have the capacity for common activities of daily living (ADLs). Seeking to address this deficiency, we sought to evaluate the surgical outcomes and quality of life in patients after C2-sacrum PSF.

Methods

Study Design and Patient Population

A single-center, multi-surgeon, retrospective cohort study of patients undergoing C2-sacrum fusion was performed. The study period was 6 years from 2015-2020. Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval was obtained to examine these data using a validated, standardized database. All patients, both pediatric and adult, who had undergone C2-sacrum PSF during the study period and who had full-body radiographs pre and postoperatively were included. Patients who had incomplete preoperative and postoperative SRS, ODI, and EQ-5D scores, or incomplete preoperative and postoperative x-rays, were excluded in the analysis of those metrics. Informed consent was obtained from patients in collecting the data for this research.

Data Collection

Demographic and comorbidity data included age, sex, comorbidities, connective tissue disease, neurologic pathology. Smoking status was also determined at time of C2-sacrum PSF. Operative data included total operative time (minutes), time to reoperation, indications for reoperation, and any subsequent complications following reoperation. All demographic and perioperative data was collected through retrospective review of the electronic medical record (EMR).

Outcome Measures

Outcomes included surgical outcomes and PRO measures. Surgical outcomes included reoperation and indication for any reoperation. A reoperation was defined as any unplanned return to OR for spine surgery after the C2-sacrum PSF. Reasons for reoperation were surgical site infection or mechanical failure, which included pseudarthrosis, rod fracture, proximal/distal junctional pathology, or implant failure, as defined by previous studies.¹⁴ The number of reoperations and details of management during each were noted.

Patient reported outcome measures collected preoperatively and postoperatively included SRS and ODI scores at 6-months, and in select patients longer follow-up was utilized. EQ-5D, as well as targeted questions regarding ADLs, hobbies, and toileting, were only collected at a mean 2.4 years postoperatively to understand the current quality of life in patients living with C2-sacrum PSF.

Statistical Analysis

Descriptive statistics were performed to summarize patient demographics, comorbidities, presenting signs/symptoms, and operative data. Categorical data were presented as frequencies and percentages, whereas continuous data were presented with mean and standard deviations (SD). Paired t-tests were used to compare PROs at different times in a patient’s perioperative course. Student t-tests were used to compare differences in scores between different groups of patients. Additionally, linear regression was utilized to assess relationships between variables such as EQ-5D and time since C2-sacrum PSF.

Results

Patient Sample

A total of 23 patients who had undergone C2-sacrum PSF were reviewed. At the time of C2-sacrum PSF, mean age was 53. Thirteen patients (57%) were male. Of those requiring C2-S PSF as a revision (21 patients), 17 patients required it to address kyphosis. Two patients underwent C2-sacrum PSF as their index procedure (Figure 1). One patient was revised to C2-sacrum PSF for myelopathy (Table 1).

Figure 1.

Case: Anteroposterior and lateral radiographs of a 67-year-old man who required C2-sacrum PSF as his index procedure for pathologic compression fractures. (a) Preoperative radiographs at presentation with 124° of thoracic kyphosis (TK). (b) Preoperative CT scan. (c) Radiographs after halo traction (d) Radiographs after C2-sacrum PSF, with 67° of TK.

Table 1.

Patient Demographics Patient Demographics and Indications for C2-sacrum PSF.

Patient	Age at C2-Sacrum	Sex	Selected Comorbidities	Smoker
1	14	M	CP	N
2	49	F	BS	Y
3	69	F	PD, Opr	N
4	38	M		N
5	28	F	MS	N
6	50	F	LD, Opr	Y
7	67	M		N
8	69	M	PD	N
9	25	M	KF, ED	N
10	62	F	Opr	^a
11	64	F	Opn	N
12	68	F		N
13	22	M	KF, ED, Opn	N
14	17	M	KF	N
15	58	M	Opn	N
16	57	M	PD	N
17	69	F	Opr	N
18	59	M		N
19	67	M		N
20	66	F		^a
21	72	M	Opr	N
22	66	F	Opn	N
23	73	M	PD, Opr	^a

MS, Marfan syndrome; BS, brown sequard syndrome; LD, Loeys Deitz, LE, Ehlers Danlos; KF, Klippel Feil; CP, Cerebral Palsy; PD, Parkinson’s disease; Opr, osteoporosis; Opn, osteopenia.

^aPreviously smoked but quit prior to first spine surgery.

Reoperations Following C2-sacrum PSF

Of 23 patients undergoing a C2-sacrum PSF, 6 patients (26%) required an average of 1.7 ± .8 reoperations. Three patients had 1 reoperation, 2 patients had 2 reoperations, and 1 patient had 3 reoperations (Table 2). Reoperations occurred an average of 1.5 years (range 14 days-4 years) after the initial C2-sacrum PSF. Locations of the revisions included: cervicothoracic (5), thoracolumbar (4), and cervical (1) spine. Of the 10 reoperations, 5 were for mechanical failure; 3, for wound/infection; 2, for prominent instrumentation/spinous processes. No extension to occiput or neurologic compromise were seen. No patient with a reoperation had neurologic comorbidities, such as Parkinson’s disease.

Table 2.

Complications and Corresponding Management Data for Patients Requiring Reoperation After C2-Sacrum PSF.

Patient	Age at C2-Sacrum	Time from C2-Sacrum to Failure (Years)	Indications for Reoperation	#Procedures after C2-Sacrum	Management	EQ5-D at Time of Survey
1	64.35	4.06	Broken rod	1	Revision instrumentation and fusion, with PCOs	.499
2	68.34	.94	Broken rod	1	Revision instrumentation and fusion	n/a
3	72.97	1.65	Broken screws	1	Revision instrumentation and fusion	.54
4	50.40	1.27	Prominent instrumentation	2	1. Removal of instrumentation with revision instrumentation and fusion 2. I & D with excision of prominent spinous processes	.29
5	71.84	.82	Screw pullout	2	1. ACDF 2. Revision instrumentation and fusion with extension to C1	n/a
6	65.97	.04	Hematoma/infection	3	1. I&D 2. I&D, abx beads, wound vac 3. I&D, plastics closure with i-vac	.704

Four patients experienced 5 mechanical failures of instrumentation. One patient, a 72-year-old male, experienced pullout of screws bilaterally at C2-C4 after a series of falls 10 months postoperatively. Of note, he had suffered an upper thoracic fracture and proximal junctional kyphosis (PJK), which had required C2-sacrum PSF. Two reoperations were required to manage this: an ACDF was performed initially, followed by revision posterior instrumentation and fusion with extension to C1. Two patients dealt with rod fractures at the thoracolumbar spine: a 68-year-old female experienced bilateral iliac screw connector and T12 rod fractures 11 months postoperatively and was found to have pseudarthrosis and kyphotic posturing with +10 cm SVA, requiring revision T4-sacrum PSF. The other patient, a 64-year-old female had bilateral T12-L2 rod fracture with progressive coronal/sagittal malalignment 4 years postoperatively, requiring revision T9-sacrum PSF (Figure 2). The remaining patient, a 72-year-old male, experienced right-sided L2/3 and S1 screw fractures with pseudarthrosis at 1.6 years postoperatively, requiring revision T12-sacrum PSF and a TLIF at L4/5. Importantly, 75% of these patients with a mechanical failure after C2-sacrum PSF had either osteoporosis or osteopenia.

Figure 2.

Case: A 64-year-old woman presented after prior instrumentation and fusion at an outside institution, which was complicated by PJK (a). She required C2-sacrum PSF (b) and did well until 4 years postoperatively when she presented with pain and forward-pitched posture. Her radiographs revealed broken rods (c). She required revision instrumentation and fusion from T9 to sacrum (d).

Outside of mechanical complications, prominent instrumentation and wound infections were seen. One patient, a 50-year-old female, complained of prominent instrumentation postoperatively, requiring reoperation 1 year after C2-sacrum PSF. Instrumentation (both rods and pedicle screws) from C2-T1 were removed during the first reoperation and replaced, minimizing prominence. Six months later, though the hardware was not prominent, this patient experienced prominence of her C6 and C7 spinous processes, which required a second reoperation for spinous process resection. Notably, this patient had Loeys-Dietz, a connective tissue disorder associated with cutaneous anomalies. Additionally, this patient was 1 of 2 smokers in our cohort.

The sixth patient required reoperation after C2-sacrum PSF for postoperative hematoma and surgical site infection. The 66-year-old female had 5 prior procedures before C2-sacrum PSF; most recently she had undergone a T3-pelvis PSF to address PJK from a prior procedure, which was subsequently complicated by myelopathy, necessitating a decompression and extension to C2. This procedure was complicated by hematoma formation, which required 3 additional procedures. Initially she underwent irrigation and debridement (I&D) 2 weeks after C2-sacrum PSF, followed by repeat I&D, antibiotic bead placement, and application of a wound vac 3 weeks later. A third return to the OR 1 week later concluded her management with a repeat I&D, wound closure with plastic surgery, and application of an incisional wound vac.

Patient Reported Outcomes

Thirteen patients (57%) had SRS-22 scores available, and 12 patients (52%) had ODI data available for preoperative and postoperative comparison. In addition, 18 patients completed EQ-5D surveys a mean 2.4 years (range .5-4.5) after C2-sacrum PSF. Minimum follow up was 6 months among those who completed the EQ-5D survey: 3 patients (17%) had a follow up of less than year after C2-sacrum PSF, 15 patients (83%) had follow up greater than 1 year, and 11 patients (61%) had follow up of over 2 years. Among those with a follow up of at least 2 years, 9 patients had baseline and postoperative ODI scores available for comparison (Table 3). Both SRS-22 and ODI scores improved significantly within 6 months of C2-sacrum PSF (SRS: 57.5 to 76.3, P = .0014; ODI: 47.0 to 31.7, P = .013) (Figure 3). Similarly, at a mean 2.4 years postoperatively, mean ODI remained significantly improved (47.0 to 30.4, P = .0032). Among those with a follow up of at least 1 year, ODI improved to 32.5. Among those patients with at least 2 years of follow up, ODI remained significantly decreased (28.4) compared to baseline scores (p-val .03, Table 3). Six patients (33%) reached a minimal symptom state (ODI <20). Postoperatively in all C2-sacrum PSF patients, the median EQ-5D score at most recent follow up was .74 (range .19 to 1.0) (Figure 4). Among those with at least 1 year follow up, the median EQ-5D score was .73; among those with at least 2 years of follow up, the median EQ-5D score was .76 (Table 3). The median rather than mean was used because 1 outlier patient had spastic cerebral palsy with quadriplegia and correspondingly decreased outcomes scores. Interestingly, there was no significant difference in EQ-5D score between the patients who underwent reoperation after C2-sacrum PSF and those who did not require reoperation (EQ5D = .64 vs .73, P = .36). Furthermore, there was no correlation between EQ-5D scores and time since the most recent reoperation (P = .92, r² < .01), signifying that the time since the most recent operation did not account for the variability in EQ-5D scores. The median postoperative EQ-5D score for our patient sample (.74) was similar and better than scores for patients with other common medical conditions as follows: diabetes mellitus (.69), arthritis (.54), asthma (.74),¹⁵ and hypertension (.73)¹⁶ (Figure 5).

Table 3.

PROs Among Patients with at Least 2 Years Follow-Up.

Patient	Years since C2-S PSF	Baseline ODI	ODI at Last Followup	EQ-5D Score
1	4.50	62	11	.679
2	2.52	26	22	.861
3	2.85	24	10	.756
4	3.36	58	29	.826
5	3.79	22	14	.778
6	2.23	50	46	.732
7	4.48	70	53	.499
8	2.92	18	7	.861
9	3.40	58	64	.540
Mean score		43.1	28.4	.726

Figure 3.

SRS and ODI scores over time among patients with C2-sacrum PSF.

Figure 4.

Distribution of EQ-5D scores after C2-sacrum PSF.

Figure 5.

Postoperative EQ-5D Scores in C2-sacrum PSF vs Chronic Health Conditions.

Activities of Daily Living

Patients were surveyed at a mean 2.4 years after C2-sacrum PSF about their ability to participate in ADLs (Table 4). 10 patients (56%) regularly exercised a mean 4.5 days/week. 11 patients (61%) could do light aerobic activity (e.g. stationary bike). 10 patients (55%) were able to play with children/grandchildren as desired. Eight patients (44%) hiked, and 2 (11%) drove independently. 11 (61%) could tolerate short air-travel comfortably. Of the 17 patients who could toilet and perform basic hygiene preoperatively, 16 patients (94%) were able to do so postoperatively. The remaining patient, who also had the lowest EQ-5D score (.192), had quadriplegic cerebral palsy and had been unable to independently toilet and perform basic hygiene preoperatively.

Table 4.

Patient Ability to Participate in Hobbies and ADLs Following C2-Sacrum PSF.

Activity	Proportion of Respondents, %
Hobbies
Regular exercise (Y/N)	61
Regular walks (Y/N)	61
Light aerobic activity (Y/N)	61
Moderate aerobic activity (Y/N)	22
Enjoy outdoors/go hiking (Y/N)	44
Ski/snowboard (Y/N)	11
Golf/tennis (Y/N)	11
Play with children as desired (Y/N)	56
Drive independently (Y/N)	61
Wear clothes as desired (Y/N)	78
Short flight comfortably (Y/N)	61
Long flight comfortably (Y/N)	33
Toileting
Urinate independently (Y/N)	94
BM independently (Y/N)	94
Wipe bottom area independently (Y/N)	89

Discussion

After a C2-sacrum PSF, 26% of patients required reoperation, most commonly for mechanical failure. Despite the need for reoperation in a quarter of the sample, the quality of life was not significantly different from those who did not require reoperation after C2-sacrum PSF. Moreover, over half of the patients in this sample report being able to regularly exercise and many of the patients remain able to participate in outdoor activities and travel. Quality of life in patients with C2-sacrum PSF were better or similar to other commonly seen chronic medical conditions such as diabetes and hypertension, indicating that patients can maintain a high quality of life with a C2-sacrum PSF.

Surgical Outcomes

Mechanical failures after long-construct fusions are well-known and common complications, including rod fractures, pseudarthrosis, and implant failure. Akazawa et al. reviewed patients with an average of 10 levels fused and found that 5% of patients experienced rod fracture,¹⁷ which was comparable to the 2 patients (8.7%) in our sample who experienced rod fractures. The authors also suggested that this complication may occur more often in patients with iliac screws and in patients with small-diameter rods. Pseudarthrosis is another common mechanical complication and is often seen at approximately 1 year postoperatively most commonly at the thoracolumbar and lumbosacral junctions, with sagittal rod contours >60°.¹⁸ Indeed, 1 patient in our sample had pseudarthrosis and rod fracture at the thoracolumbar junction at approximately 4 years after C2-sacrum PSF; the other, at the lumbosacral junction at 1 year after C2-sacrum PSF. Thus, attention to the thoracolumbar and lumbosacral transitional zones is crucial to promote bony fusion. It is routine at our center to use BMP and reinforce these areas with multiple rods. Iyer et al note a higher rate of complications in their cohort of patients undergoing fusion from the cervical spine to the pelvis. Their population did differ from ours in that the mean age of our cohort was nearly 15 years younger and we focused exclusively on those whose constructs extended up to C2, whereas their cohort encompassed other cervical spine levels as the UIV, potentially allowing for more complications like PJK.

While only 2 patients of the 23 in this sample were smokers, smoking may have contributed to postoperative complications. One of these patients had prominent spinal instrumentation and spinous processes requiring 2 reoperations. Nicotine disrupts the epidermal barrier and reduces collagen synthesis,¹⁹ thereby weaking the epidermis, which likely contributed to the wound complications in this patient.²⁰ In addition to smoking, this patient had Loeys Dietz syndrome, which presents with translucent skin and easy bruising,²¹ heightening the risk for symptomatic instrumentation prominence. Smoking cessation, even as late as 4 weeks prior to surgery,²² can reduce the risk of complications associated with surgery. Similarly, osteoporosis likely contributed to postoperative complications seen in our patient sample. Three of 4 patients (75%) with mechanical complications had either osteoporosis or osteopenia. Biomechanical studies have assessed pull-out strength of screws and have found correlations with insertion depth and bone density: osteoporotic bone has significantly less pedicle screw pull out strength compared to normal bone, likely contributing in part to the mechanical failures, as in this sample’s patient who had multilevel cervical spine screw pullout after a fall.²³ The perioperative management of patients with decreased bone mineral density is critical: consultation with an endocrinologist or primary care physician comfortable managing it may be beneficial to patients as many patients with osteoporosis are undermanaged prior to their surgeries. Surgical techniques may also be modified in the osteoporotic patient. PMMA cement may be used to prefill a trajectory prior to placing a solid pedicle screw, which can increase pullout strength substantially.²⁴ Additional instrumentation including sublaminar wires or laminar hooks may be used to increase the strength of instrumentation during a posterior approach to the spine.²⁵ Therefore, a multidisciplinary approach involving both primary care physicians as well as spine surgeons is critical in the management of osteoporotic patients who require long-construct PSF.

Patient-Reported Outcomes

Patients living with C2-Sacrum PSF had a high quality of life similarly to those with other commonly seen medical conditions. Many were able to exercise, travel, and participate in family activities. The EQ-5D questionnaire has been used previously to quantify PROs for patients undergoing orthopaedic surgery.²⁶ While there did not appear to be a significant difference in EQ-5D scores between those who underwent reoperation after C2-sacrum PSF and those who did not, this study’s small sample size may have resulted in inadequate power to detect a significant difference that may exist in the population. Interestingly, the median EQ-5D was .74, which compared favorably to patients with hip/knee osteoarthritis (EQ-5D .63), diabetes (.69) and hypertension (.73)¹⁵ (Figure 5). This may indicate that patients adapt well to daily life after having C2-sacrum PSF. This is consistent with prior findings that many factors, especially social determinants of health, can affect postoperative outcomes, including the risk of pseudarthrosis and the decision to pursue revision surgery.²⁷

Limitations

The small sample size is the key limiting factor in this study. As there were only 6 subjects who required reoperation, it is challenging to generalize observations in any individual patient, whether it be about timing of C2-sacrum PSF failure or HRQoL measures. Additionally, the patients in this study were observed at a single institution, which may affect the generalizability of our results. HRQoL metrics were not uniformly obtained in all patients, which made it challenging to compare self-reported outcomes of patients. Additionally, while EQ-5D scores were obtained during our phone survey, we did not have the EQ-5D scores recorded for patients preoperatively, making it impossible to compare EQ-5D preoperatively and postoperatively. Furthermore, the EQ-5D scores were consecutively recorded at 1 time point, thus creating discrepancies in the timing of scores relative to C2-sacrum PSF, making it difficult to compare scores for patients at specific times relative to their C2-sacrum PSF procedure.

Future Directions

Future studies will require larger samples of patients receiving C2-sacrum PSF with control groups. Control groups will better identify risk factors for complications such as prominent instrumentation or mechanical failure observed in this cohort. Moreover, additional surgeons from multiple centers will increase the generalizability of this study. The patients who were reviewed experienced complications at an average of 1.5 years after C2-sacrum PSF. Additional complications may only manifest later; therefore, further longitudinal study of these patients may alert us to complications occurring later in clinical course. Future studies will need to measure HRQoL metrics at regular time intervals following C2-sacrum PSF, enabling more accurate postoperative comparisons between patients.

Conclusion

In a sample of 23 patients with C2-sacrum PSF, a relatively high quality of life was seen with most patients able to complete normal ADLs, partake in hobbies, exercise, travel, and participate in family activities. That said, approximately a quarter of patients undergoing C2-sacrum PSF required reoperation, most commonly due to mechanical failure. Nevertheless, patients in this population fared well after C2-sacrum PSF with improvements in quality of life. Those who required reoperation did not have significantly poorer scores by these metrics than patients who did not require reoperation. These data represent one of the largest samples of patients with C2-sacrum PSF and hopefully leads to further multi-institutional studies.

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research,authorship,and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research,authorship,and/or publication of this article.

Ethical Approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

IRB Number

AAAT2038

ORCID iDs

Justin Mathew

Hannah Lin

Nathan J. Lee

References

Theologis

Deviren

Tay

. Temporary fusionless posterior occipitocervical fixation for a proximal junctional type II odontoid fracture after previous C2-pelvis fusion: case report, description of a new surgical technique, and review of the literature. Eur Spine J. Published online April 13. 2017:1-6. doi:10.1007/s00586-017-5093-8

Iyer

Kim

Theologis

, et al. Outcomes of Fusions From the Cervical Spine to the Pelvis. Glob Spine J. Published online. 2019;9:6‐13. doi:10.1177/2192568217705655

Weistroffer

Perra

Lonstein

Schwender

Garvey

Transfeldt

, et al. Complications in long fusions to the sacrum for adult scoliosis: Minimum five-year analysis of fifty patients. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2008;33(13):1478-1483. doi:10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181753c53

Chen

Y-R

Chan

Kumar

Veeravagu

. Cervical fracture/subluxation in a patient with a prior C2-sacrum fusion: Case report and review of literature. Cureus. 2016;8(11), e888. doi:10.7759/cureus.888

Ofiram

Garvey

Schwender

Wroblewski

Winter

. Cervical degenerative changes in idiopathic scoliosis patients who underwent long fusion to the sacrum as adults: Incidence, severity, and evolution. J Orthop Traumatol. 2009;10(1):27-30. doi:10.1007/s10195-008-0044-0

Theologis

Mundis

Nguyen

, et al. Utility of multilevel lateral interbody fusion of the thoracolumbar coronal curve apex in adult deformity surgery in combination with open posterior instrumentation and L5-S1 interbody fusion: A case-matched evaluation of 32 patients. J Neurosurg Spine. 2017;26(2):208-219. doi:10.3171/2016.8.SPINE151543

Edwards

Bridwell

Patel

Rinella

Berra

Lenke

. Long adult deformity fusions to L5 and the sacrum: A matched cohort analysis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). Published online 2004. doi:10.1097/01.brs.0000138272.54896.33

Makino

Kaito

Fujiwara

Honda

Spine

, 2017 undefined. Risk factors for poor patient-reported quality of life outcomes after posterior lumbar interbody fusion. ingentaconnect.com. https://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/wk/brs/2017/00000042/00000019/art00024. Accessed July 10, 2021.

Youssef

Heiner

Montgomery

, Journal GT-TS, 2019 undefined. Outcomes of Posterior Cervical Fusion and Decompression: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Elsevier. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1529943019301664. Accessed July 10, 2021.

10.

Asher

Devin

Kerezoudis

, SC-, 2019 undefined. Comparison of outcomes following anterior vs posterior fusion surgery for patients with degenerative cervical myelopathy: An analysis from quality outcomes database. academic.oup.com. https://academic.oup.com/neurosurgery/article-abstract/84/4/919/4993889. Accessed July 10, 2021.

11.

Djurasovic

Glassman

Howard

, Spine AC-, 2011 undefined. Health-related quality of life improvements in patients undergoing lumbar spinal fusion as a revision surgery. journals.lww.com. https://journals.lww.com/spinejournal/Fulltext/2011/02150/Influence_of_Number_of_Operated_Levels_and.2.aspx?casa_token=5TSjWyb-xPIAAAAA:x9ADhPLUP6L97FZ8GYwzV7S5-GiE-N0gAQ0iHG-bmFbHjKkXuTRdwytdDrveLv6WU3nY3l82ddtnC3PyMHHBXn4IvF8e. Accessed July 10, 2021.

12.

Zuckerman

Cerpa

Lenke

, et al. Patient-Reported outcomes after complex adult spinal deformity surgery: 5-year results of the scoli-risk-1 study. journals.sagepub.com. Published online 2021. doi:10.1177/2192568220988276

13.

Smith

Line

Bess

Shaffrey

, HK-, 2017 undefined. The health impact of adult cervical deformity in patients presenting for surgical treatment: comparison to United States population norms and chronic disease states. academic.oup.com. https://academic.oup.com/neurosurgery/article-abstract/80/5/716/3084602. Accessed July 10, 2021.

14.

Yilgor

Sogunmez

Yavuz

, et al. Global alignment and proportion (GAP) score: Development and validation of a new method of analyzing spinopelvic alignment to predict mechanical complications after adult spinal deformity surgery. Spine J. 2017;17(10):S155-S156. doi:10.1016/J.SPINEE.2017.07.234

15.

Mujica-Mota

Roberts

Abel

, et al. Common patterns of morbidity and multi-morbidity and their impact on health-related quality of life: evidence from a national survey. doi:10.1007/s11136-014-0820-7

16.

Brazier

Kearns

Relton

Smith

Cooper

. Examining the impact of 11 long-standing health conditions on health-related quality of life using the EQ-5D in a general population sample. doi:10.1007/s10198-013-0559-z

17.

Akazawa

Kotani

Sakuma

Nemoto

Minami

. Rod fracture after long construct fusion for spinal deformity: clinical and radiographic risk factors. doi:10.1007/s00776-013-0464-4

18.

Barton

Noshchenko

Patel

Cain

Kleck

Burger

. Risk factors for rod fracture after posterior correction of adult spinal deformity with osteotomy: A retrospective case-series. Scoliosis. 2015;10(1):1-11. doi:10.1186/s13013-015-0056-5

19.

Prieux

Eeman

Rothen-Rutishauser

Valacchi

. Mimicking cigarette smoke exposure to assess cutaneous toxicity. Toxicol Vitr. 2020;62:104664. doi:10.1016/j.tiv.2019.104664

20.

Sørensen

. Wound healing and infection in surgery: The pathophysiological impact of smoking, smoking cessation, and nicotine replacement therapy: A systematic review. Ann Surg. 2012;255(6):1069-1079. doi:10.1097/SLA.0b013e31824f632d

21.

Verstraeten

Dietz

Loeys

. Loeys–Dietz syndrome. In: Cassidy and Allanson’s Management of Genetic Syndromes. Wiley; 2021:563-576. doi:10.1002/9781119432692.ch36

22.

Lindström

Azodi

Wladis

, et al. Effects of a perioperative smoking cessation intervention on postoperative complications: A randomized trial. Ann Surg. 2008;248(5):739-745. doi:10.1097/SLA.0b013e3181889d0d

23.

Varghese

Saravana Kumar

Krishnan

. Effect of various factors on pull out strength of pedicle screw in normal and osteoporotic cancellous bone models. Med Eng Phys. 2017;40:28-38. doi:10.1016/j.medengphy.2016.11.012

24.

Sawakami

Yamazaki

Ishikawa

Ito

Watanabe

Endo

. Polymethylmethacrylate augmentation of pedicle screws increases the initial fixation in osteoporotic spine patients. J Spinal Disord Tech. 2012;25(2), E28‐E35. doi:10.1097/BSD.0b013e318228bbed

25.

Lehman

Kang

Wagner

. Management of osteoporosis in spine surgery. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2015;23(4):253-263. doi:10.5435/JAAOS-D-14-00042

26.

Jansson

KÅ

Granath

. Health-related quality of life (EQ-5D) before and after orthopedic surgery. Acta Orthop. 2011;82(1):82-89. doi:10.3109/17453674.2010.548026

27.

Khalid

Maasarani

Nunna

, et al. Association between social determinants of health and postoperative outcomes in patients undergoing single-level lumbar fusions: A matched analysis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2021;46(9):E559-E565. doi:10.1097/BRS.0000000000003829

Living with a C2-Sacrum Spinal Fusion: Surgical Outcomes and Quality of Life in Patients Fused from C2 to the Sacrum

Abstract

Study Design

Objectives

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Keywords

Introduction

Methods

Study Design and Patient Population

Data Collection

Outcome Measures

Statistical Analysis

Results

Patient Sample

Reoperations Following C2-sacrum PSF

Patient Reported Outcomes

Activities of Daily Living

Discussion

Surgical Outcomes

Patient-Reported Outcomes

Limitations

Future Directions

Conclusion

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

Funding

Ethical Approval

IRB Number

ORCID iDs

References