No abstract

Knee flexion as a compensatory mechanism to sagittal imbalance was well correlated to the lack of lordosis and, depending on the importance of the former parameter, the best procedure to correct sagittal imbalance could be chosen.

Introduction In adult spinal deformity (ASD), sagittal imbalance and sagittal malalignment have been extensively described in the literature during the past decade, whereas coronal imbalance and coronal malalignment (CM) have been given little attention. CM can cause severe impairment in adult scoliosis and ASD patients, as compensatory mechanisms are limited. The aim of this paper is to develop a comprehensive classification of coronal spinopelvic malalignment and to suggest a treatment algorithm for this condition. Methods This is an expert's opinion consensus based on a retrospective review of CM cases where different patterns of CM were identified, in addition to treatment modifiers. After the identification of the subgroups for each category, surgical planning for each subgroup could be specified. Results Two main CM patterns were defined: concave CM (type 1) and convex CM (type 2), and the following modifiers were identified as potentially influencing the choice of surgical strategy: stiffness of the main coronal curve, coronal mobility of the lumbosacral junction and degeneration of the lumbosacral junction. A surgical algorithm was proposed to deal with each situation combining the different patterns and their modifiers. Conclusion Coronal malalignment is a frequent condition, usually associated to sagittal malalignment, but it is often misunderstood. Its classification should help the spine surgeon to better understand the full spinal alignment of ASD patients. In concave CM, the correction should be obtained at the apex of the main curve. In convex CM, the correction should be obtained at the lumbosacral junction.Graphical abstract These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material.

We observed some differences concerning the safe working zone in comparison with other cadaveric studies. The small number of cadaveric specimens used in anatomical studies probably explains theses differences. The minimally invasive transpsoas lateral approach was initially developed to reduce the complications associated with the traditional procedure. The anatomical relationships between the lumbar plexus and the intervertebral disc make this technique particularly risky a L4L5. Alternative techniques, such as transforaminal interbody fusion (TLIF), posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) or anterior interbody fusion (ALIF) should be used at this level.

Surgical management of low- and mid-grade isthmic spondylolisthesis showed good clinical outcome with restoration of correct values for the pelvic position-dependent parameters, i.e., pelvis tilt, sacral slope, C7 plumb line position and SSA.