History:
The patient is a 31 year-old male with a long history of intractable
lumbar back pain. He was diagnosed with ankylosing spondylitis
and has been unable to work for the last 10 years secondary to
pain. All of his pain is in the back and he denies any pain in
his legs. He notes that he has become increasingly "pitched
forward" over the last several years and that he is unable
to see more than 20 feet in front. He has almost no motion throughout
his spine and walks with his knees flexed to allow him to see
forward.
Radiographs of the patient's
entire spine demonstrate almost complete autofusion through the
thoracolumbar spine. The lateral radiograph demonstrates a marked
loss of lumbar lordosis and global sagittal imbalance with the
C7 vertical plumb line roughly 10 cm. in front of the pelvis
(yellow line).
Surgical Options:
Traditionally ankylosing spondylitis has been treated with extension
osteotomies at the level of the deformity. Originally described
by Smith-Petersen in 1945, these osteotomies are done by taking
the posterior elements completely off at the level of the disc
space; the spine is then extended through the osteotomized segments
and disc spaces. The amount of correction attainable through
each disc space is roughly 10-15°. After the osteotomy is
done, it is usually necessary to perform anterior structural
grafting at the levels of osteotomy to prevent anterior collapse
and settling.
Another option for improving the sagittal imbalance is with a
pedicle subtraction osteotomy. In a pedicle subtraction osteotomy,
the posterior elements are carefully resected along with a decancellation
of the body via a transpedicular route. The lateral margins of
the pedicle and body are carefully removed and the entire spine
is extended through the osteotomy. The advantages of a pedicle
subtraction osteotomy are that it is entirely accomplished through
a posterior approach without the need for an anterior procedure.
As well, 35-40° of lordosis can be expected with an adequate
osteotomy.
Surgery:
Because of the dramatic global sagittal imbalance and the fact
that the patient already had a complete autofusion through his
thoracolumbar spine, it was decided that a pedicle subtraction
osteotomy was the best option. He underwent an L3 PSO with instrumentation
and fusion from T12-S1. The amount of correction that was achieved
in the sagittal plane as a result of the PSO was roughly 45 degrees.
|
|
Lateral radiographs demonstrate
a much more physiologic lordosis. Note the wedged L3 vertebral
body and the absence of pedicles at the L3 vertebral body. Also
the C7 plumb line is at the back of the sacral endplate, a correction
of 10 cm. In the lateral x-ray, the resected pedicles are seen
at L3 (yellow arrow). A generous central decompression (red curve)
was also performed to avoid kinking of the dura during closure
of the osteotomy.
|
|
Clinical photos taken 6 weeks
postoperatively. The patient is happy with his progress and has
much better vision because of improved posture.
Discussion:
Patients with fixed sagittal imbalance (FSI) are complicated
cases who often require fairly involved surgeries to achieve
an acceptable position. There are many etiologies of FSI including
ankylosing spondylitis, postlaminectomy kyphosis, iatrogenic
flatback, and posttraumatic kyphosis. Many of these patients
have previously had one or more surgeries, further complicating
their treatment.
Evaluation of sagittal imbalance is best done with a standing
long cassette of the entire spine. A plumb line is dropped from
the middle of C7. This plumb line should intersect the back or
the middle of the lumbosacral disc. If the plumb line is in front
of the lumbosacral disc, the patient is defined as having forward
or anterior sagittal imbalance. To evaluate the flexibility of
the deformity, a hyperextension lateral x-ray taken over a bolster
is invaluable.
In determining the optimal thoracic kyphosis/lumbar lordosis
ratio in a patient, a good rule of thumb is that a patient should
generally have 30° more lumbar lordosis than thoracic kyphosis.
Strict attention should be paid to the relationship of the C7
plumbline to the lumbosacral disc as previously discussed.
Options for increasing lordosis include Smith-Petersen osteotomies
or a pedicle subtraction osteotomy. Smith-Petersen osteotomies
will achieve 1 degree of correction for each mm of bone resected.
The average osteotomy will achieve 10-15° of correction;
a patient with a great deal of kyphosis will then need osteotomies
over several levels to achieve reasonable balance. As well, an
anterior procedure is often necessary to fill in the disc spaces
at the osteotomized levels which will be extended open by the
posterior column resection and closure. A pedicle subtraction
osteotomy can be expected to achieve 35-40° of correction
and potentially avoid the need for an anterior procedure, because
the anterior and middle columns are closed with closure of the
posterior column osteotomy.
When performing osteotomies, they should general be done at the
level of maximal deformity. This is usually the L3/4 level, which
also corresponds to the normal apex of lordosis. This also is
safer in terms of neurologic damage as it is well away from the
spinal cord. A pedicle subtraction osteotomy achieves a great
deal of correction through one level and there is a risk of "kinking"
of the nerve roots and dura. It is imperative to perform a generous
central decompression both superiorly and inferiorly to avoid
neurologic injury. After closure of the osteotomy we perform
a wake-up test to assure that no untoward neurologic events have
occurred.

This
case was treated in exactly the manner that I would have treated
it.
When doing
a pedicle subtraction osteotomy on an ankylosing spondylitis
patient, it is essential that the surgeon does not cut all the
way through anteriorly. In fact, all that is needed is to implode
the posterior wall, pushing it anteriorly into the void of the
vertebral body, and making sure the lateral cortex is also slightly
weakened so that when you "crack" the spine, the spine
remains coronally stable. From clinical experience I would note
that with this type of patient, if you cut too far, you can destabilize
the spine, thus risking coronal decompensation, and/or subluxation
of the canal and vertebra resulting in the anterior cortical
hinge at the front of the spine, breaking and destabilizing.
There
should be some concern about blood loss during this procedure,
although in these patients it's not that severe. In addition,
if your screw fixation is questionable, you may have to use cement
to augment the screws. However the best bone structure in a patient
with ankylosing spondylitis is the posterior lamina. Therefore,
you may elect to use hooks for fixation, although I prefer to
use screws.