Comparison of Clinical and Radiological Outcomes of Three-Column Lumbar Osteotomies with and without Interbody Cages for Adult Spinal Deformity.

Background Context: Correcting sagittal malalignment in adult spinal deformity (ASD) is a challenging task, often requiring complex surgical interventions like pedicle subtraction osteotomies (PSOs). Different types of three-column osteotomies (3COs), including Schwab 3, Schwab 4, Schwab 4 with interbody cages, and the "sandwich" technique, aim to optimize alignment and fusion outcomes. The role of interbody cages in enhancing fusion and segmental correction remains unclear.

Purpose: This study aimed to compare outcomes among these 4 3CO techniques, evaluating the impact of cage use at the osteotomy site on postoperative radiographic imaging and clinical outcomes.

Study Design/setting: This is a multicenter retrospective study utilizing data from a prospective multicenter database of patients undergoing complex ASD surgery.

Patient Sample: Ninety-seven patients who underwent 1 of 4 3CO techniques for thoracolumbar ASD correction with at least 2 years of follow-up were included. The sample consisted of 29 patients who underwent Schwab 3 osteotomy, 20 Schwab 4, 28 Schwab 4 with interbody cages, and 20 who underwent "sandwich" osteotomy.

Outcome Measures: The Scoliosis Research Society-22 revised (SRS22r) questionnaire evaluating pain, activity, appearance, mental health, and satisfaction was used to evaluate patient reported outcomes and radiographic measures including segmental lordosis and fusion rates determined by 3 blinded reviewers were used to evaluate physiologic outcomes.

Methods: This study analyzed demographic data, radiographic outcomes, patient-reported outcomes, complications, and fusion rates over a 2-year follow-up period. Fusion status was determined via serial radiographs and evaluated independently by 3 blinded reviewers. Univariate and multivariate statistical analyses were performed to assess differences among the groups and the impact of interbody cage use on outcomes.

Results: Patients undergoing "sandwich" osteotomy exhibited worse preoperative leg pain scores and lower SRS22r activity (P=0.015), appearance (P=0.007), and mental health domain scores (P=0.0015). No differences in complications were found among groups (P>0.05). Patients who underwent osteotomy with a cage were more likely to have had previous spine fusion (91.7% vs. 71.4%, P=0.010). Additionally, these patients had lower preoperative SRS22r mental domain (2.9±1 vs. 3.5±1, P=0.009), satisfaction (2.3±1 vs. 2.7±1.2, P=0.034), and SRS22r total scores (2.3±0.6 vs. 2.6±0.6, P=0.0026) but demonstrated the greatest improvement in the mental health domain (0.9±0.7 vs. 0.3±0.9, P=0.002). Cage use was associated with a larger mean change in segmental lordosis at the osteotomy site (32.9±9.6 vs. 28.7±9.5, P=0.038). Fusion rates were significantly higher in the cage group (79.2% vs. 55.1%, P=0.0012). Regression analysis identified cage use as an independent predictor for fusion (odds ratio, 3.338; 95% confidence interval, 1.108-10.054, P=0.032).

Conclusions: Interbody cage use at the osteotomy site during 3COs for ASD correction was associated with improved fusion rates and greater segmental lordosis without increasing complication rates. Incorporating cages may provide enhanced alignment and fusion outcomes in complex ASD surgeries.