Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 28, 2025
Minimally Invasive Treatment for Thoracolumbar Burst Fracture Using Sagittal Alignment Screws and A Trauma Reduction Device
Published on: November 8, 2024
Cervical Sagittal Alignment and Related Factor Analysis and Prediction Model in Patients Undergoing Revision Surgery
Manini Daudi Romani1, Hong-Qi Zhang, Qi-Le Gao
1From the Department of spine surgery and Orthopedics, Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, China (Romani, Zhang, Qi-Le Gao, Liu, Deng), and the National Clinical Research Center for Geriatric Disorders, Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, China (Romani, Zhang, Qi-Le Gao, Liu, and Deng).
Introduction:
Patients with myelopathy or radiculopathy commonly undergo anterior cervical fusion surgery (ACFS), which has a notable failure rate on occasion. The goal of this study was to compare revision and nonrevision surgery patients in cervical sagittal alignment (CSA) subsequent to ACFS; additionally, to identify the best CSA parameters for predicting clinical outcome after ACFS; and furthermore, to create an equation model to assist surgeons in making decisions on patients undergoing ACFS.
Methods:
The data of 99 patients with symptomatic cervical myelopathy/radiculopathy who underwent ACFS were analyzed. Patients were divided into group A (underwent revision surgery after the first surgery failed) and group B (underwent only the first surgery). We measured and analyzed both preoperative and postoperative CSA parameters, including C2 slope, T1 slope, cervical lordosis C2-C7 (CL), C2-C7 sagittal vertical axis (C2C7 SVA), occiput-C2 lordosis angle (C0-C2), and chin brow vertical angle, and we further computed the correlation between the CSA parameters and created a prediction model.
Results:
The (T1S-CL)-C2S mismatch differed significantly between groups A and B ([9.95 ± 9.95] 0 , [3.79 ± 6.58] 0 , P < 0.05, respectively). A significant correlation was observed between C2 slope and T1CL in group B relative to group A postoperatively (R 2 = 0.42 versus R 2 = 0.09, respectively). Compared with group B, patients in group A had significantly higher C2C7SVA values, more levels of fusion, and more smokers. The sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, and discrimination of the model were, respectively, 73.5%, 84%, 78.8%, and 85.65%.
Conclusion:
The causes of revision surgery in cervical myelopathic patients after anterior cervical corpectomy and fusion/anterior cervical diskectomy and fusion are multifactorial. (T1S-CL)-C2S mismatch and high C2C7SVA are the best cervical sagittal parameters that increase the odds of revision surgery, and the effect is more enhanced when comorbidities such as smoking, low bone-mineral density, and increased levels of fusion are taken into account.
