Skip to main content
Journal cover image

The comprehensive anatomical spinal osteotomy classification.

Publication ,  Journal Article
Schwab, F; Blondel, B; Chay, E; Demakakos, J; Lenke, L; Tropiano, P; Ames, C; Smith, JS; Shaffrey, CI; Glassman, S; Farcy, J-P; Lafage, V
Published in: Neurosurgery
March 2015

BACKGROUND: Global sagittal malalignment is significantly correlated with health-related quality-of-life scores in the setting of spinal deformity. In order to address rigid deformity patterns, the use of spinal osteotomies has seen a substantial increase. Unfortunately, variations of established techniques and hybrid combinations of osteotomies have made comparisons of outcomes difficult. OBJECTIVE: To propose a classification system of anatomically-based spinal osteotomies and provide a common language among spine specialists. METHODS: The proposed classification system is based on 6 anatomic grades of resection (1 through 6) corresponding to the extent of bone resection and increasing degree of destabilizing potential. In addition, a surgical approach modifier is added (posterior approach or combined anterior and posterior approaches). Reliability of the classification system was evaluated by an analysis of 16 clinical cases, rated 2 times by 8 different readers, and calculation of Fleiss kappa coefficients. RESULTS: Intraobserver reliability was classified as 'almost perfect'; Fleiss kappa coefficient averaged 0.96 (range, 0.92-1.0) for resection type and 0.90 (0.71-1.0) for the approach modifier. Results from the interobserver reliability for the classification were 0.96 for resection type and 0.88 for the approach modifier. CONCLUSION: This proposed anatomically based classification system provides a consistent description of the various osteotomies performed in spinal deformity correction surgery. The reliability study confirmed that the classification is simple and consistent. Further development of its use will provide a common frame for osteotomy assessment and permit comparative analysis of different treatments.

Duke Scholars

Published In

Neurosurgery

DOI

EISSN

1524-4040

Publication Date

March 2015

Volume

76 Suppl 1

Start / End Page

S33 / S41

Location

United States

Related Subject Headings

  • Zygapophyseal Joint
  • Terminology as Topic
  • Spine
  • Reproducibility of Results
  • Radiography
  • Osteotomy
  • Observer Variation
  • Neurology & Neurosurgery
  • Humans
  • 5202 Biological psychology
 

Citation

APA
Chicago
ICMJE
MLA
NLM
Schwab, F., Blondel, B., Chay, E., Demakakos, J., Lenke, L., Tropiano, P., … Lafage, V. (2015). The comprehensive anatomical spinal osteotomy classification. Neurosurgery, 76 Suppl 1, S33–S41. https://doi.org/10.1227/01.neu.0000462076.73701.09
Schwab, Frank, Benjamin Blondel, Edward Chay, Jason Demakakos, Lawrence Lenke, Patrick Tropiano, Christopher Ames, et al. “The comprehensive anatomical spinal osteotomy classification.Neurosurgery 76 Suppl 1 (March 2015): S33–41. https://doi.org/10.1227/01.neu.0000462076.73701.09.
Schwab F, Blondel B, Chay E, Demakakos J, Lenke L, Tropiano P, et al. The comprehensive anatomical spinal osteotomy classification. Neurosurgery. 2015 Mar;76 Suppl 1:S33–41.
Schwab, Frank, et al. “The comprehensive anatomical spinal osteotomy classification.Neurosurgery, vol. 76 Suppl 1, Mar. 2015, pp. S33–41. Pubmed, doi:10.1227/01.neu.0000462076.73701.09.
Schwab F, Blondel B, Chay E, Demakakos J, Lenke L, Tropiano P, Ames C, Smith JS, Shaffrey CI, Glassman S, Farcy J-P, Lafage V. The comprehensive anatomical spinal osteotomy classification. Neurosurgery. 2015 Mar;76 Suppl 1:S33–S41.
Journal cover image

Published In

Neurosurgery

DOI

EISSN

1524-4040

Publication Date

March 2015

Volume

76 Suppl 1

Start / End Page

S33 / S41

Location

United States

Related Subject Headings

  • Zygapophyseal Joint
  • Terminology as Topic
  • Spine
  • Reproducibility of Results
  • Radiography
  • Osteotomy
  • Observer Variation
  • Neurology & Neurosurgery
  • Humans
  • 5202 Biological psychology