VARIABILIDADE ESPINOPÉLVICA DE ACORDO COM O TIPO DE CURVA DA CLASSIFICAÇÃO DE ROUSSOULY

coluna Coluna/Columna Coluna/Columna 1808-1851 2177-014X Sociedade Brasileira de Coluna RESUMO Objetivo Avaliar a variabilidade dos parâmetros sagitais espinopélvicos em uma amostra de pacientes, assim como a distribuição de lordose no segmento lombar da coluna vertebral. Métodos Trata-se de um estudo transversal, considerando radiografias da coluna total de uma amostra de pacientes. Os pacientes foram avaliados de acordo com a classificação de Roussouly e foram considerados os parâmetros radiográficos do alinhamento sagital espinopélvico, além da medida da lordose de cada segmento da coluna lombar. Os parâmetros radiográficos foram correlacionados com o tipo da classificação de Roussouly. Resultados Noventa pacientes foram incluídos no estudo. Houve correlação significativa entre a incidência pélvica (IP) e a lordose lombar (LL) L1-S1 (R=0,89; p<0,0001). O valor da IP foi significativamente maior nos tipos 3 e 4 de Roussouly do que nos tipos 1 e 2 (p<0,001), assim como o valor da LL L1-S1 (p<0,001). Considerando o total da amostra, 67% da LL L1-S1 estava localizada entre L4-S1, porém com variação conforme o tipo de curva pela classificação de Roussouly. Conclusões O presente estudo demonstrou grande correlação entre os valores da IP e da LL, assim como a importância do segmento lombar distal (L4-S1) no valor global da LL L1-S1, ainda maior nos pacientes com menor valor de IP (tipos 1 e 2 de Roussouly). Nível de evidência II; Análise retrospectiva de banco de dados prospectivo (coorte); Estudo diagnóstico. INTRODUCTION The study of the sagittal balance of the sagittal spine has become popular in recent decades with prolific evidence showing the correlation between the loss of spinopelvic sagittal alignment and the deterioration of function and the quality of life.1 - 4 Thus, numerous radiographic parameters have been described for an understanding of spinopelvic sagittal alignment, as well as for the recognition of loss of alignment.1 , 2 , 5 , 6 Among these radiographic parameters, pelvic shape and position parameters stand out,7 as well as lumbar lordosis (LL), measured between L1 and S1, and the relationship between LL and pelvic incidence (PI).5 However, some authors question the concept of fixed anatomical intervals for different spinal curvatures, including thoracic kyphosis measured between T4 and T12 and lumbar lordosis between T1 and S1. Berthonaud et al., for example, presented the concept of “inflection point” as a functional variable that corresponds to the point of transition between lumbar lordosis and thoracic kyphosis, regardless of the anatomical level where this occurs, and the concept of the variability of the extension of the curvatures of the spine.8 Roussouly et al. presented a classification system for normal variants of sagittal alignment of the spine, taking the form and inclination of the pelvis and the distribution of lordosis throughout the lumbar segment into account, considering the “inflection point”.9 Four types of curves were described9 and recently a fifth type was included.10 The objective of this study was to evaluate the variability of spinopelvic sagittal alignment parameters in a sample of patients, as well as the distribution of lordotic curvature in the lumbar segment of the spine. METHODS This is a prospective, cross-sectional analysis of a radiographic database of patients treated at an outpatient spine pathology clinic of a single service. The study was approved by the Institutional Review Board of the service responsible for the study (CAAE: 97266618.0.0000.5463), which waived collection of the signed Informed Consent Form as the study considered only data already established in a radiographic database. Full spinal radiography examinations (panoramic X-rays of the spine) of individuals older than 18 years of age were included, which allowed the evaluation and measurement of the spinopelvic parameters of interest. Examinations of patients with a previous history of neurological or spinal surgery, neurological or neuromuscular disease, trauma, or neoplastic disease of the spine and complaints of hip, knee, foot, or ankle disability that might alter the position of the joints were excluded. Data collection All radiographic examinations were performed at the same service following a standardized technique, with patients standing, comfortable, with the elbow in full flexion and the shoulder in 45° flexion with the hands relaxed and the fingers resting on the clavicle or the malar bone.11 , 12 The radiographic parameters of interest were measured and analyzed using Surgimap Spine software (Nemaris Inc. New York, USA), validated for the measurement of radiographic spinal parameters.13 The lordosis of each segment was measured (L1-L2, L2-L3, L3-L4, L4-L5, and L5-S1), as well as the LL between L1 and S1. ( Figure 1 ) We also considered the parameters PI, pelvic tilt (PT), sacral slope (SS), and the discrepancy between PI and LL (PI-LL). The demographic data and medical records of the patients were also considered. The patients were classified according to the sagittal alignment characteristics using the system proposed by Roussouly et al.9 Figure 1 Illustration of the measurement of the radiographic parameters considered in the study. Statistical analysis was performed using R software, version 3.4.9 (R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria). The data consisted of quantitative variables and the normality of distribution was verified by the Shapiro-Wilk test. Radiographic parameters were compared among the different Roussouly classification types using the ANOVA test. The significance level considered was 5%. RESULTS Ninety patients met the inclusion criteria and were considered in the study. ( Table 1 ) Of these, 66 patients (73%) were women and 24 (27%) were men. The mean age of the patients was 56.2 years (standard deviation [SD]: 14.6), ranging from 18 to 95 years of age. Regarding the Roussouly classification, 14 patients (15.6%) were classified as type 1, 18 (20%) as type 2, 38 (42.2%) as type 3, and 20 (22.2%) as type 4. Table 1 Demographic data of the sample and distribution by the Roussouly classification. Total sample 90 patients (100%) Men 24 patients (27%) Women 66 patients (73%) Age Mean (Standard Deviation) 56.2 years (14.6) Range 18 – 95 years Roussouly classification Type 1 14 patients (15.6%) Type 2 18 patients (20%) Type 3 38 patients (42.2%) Type 4 20 patients (22.2%) Radiographic parameters The mean PI value, considering the total sample, was 53.6° SD: 12), ranging from 22° to 88°. The mean value of PT was 13.6° (SD: 7.3°) and the mean value of SS was 40° (SD: 9.4°). The mean value of LL between L1 and S1 was 57.8° (SD: 11.2°), ranging from 27° to 80°. There was a significant correlation between the PI and the LL L1-S1 (R = 0.89, p < 0.0001). The mean value of the lordosis of the distal lumbar spine segment between L4-S1 was 39°, corresponding to 2/3 (67.2%) of the total LL between L1-S1. The mean value of PI-LL, considering the total sample, was -4.2° (SD: 5.3), ranging from -10° to 8°. Relationship between the radiographic parameters and the Roussouly classification Table 2 illustrates the relationship between the radiographic parameters and the Roussouly classification. The PI value was significantly different among the Roussouly classification types (p < 0.001), with a mean PI value of 40.2° (SD: 9.4°) for type 1, 46° (SD: 5.4°) for type 2, 54.7° (SD: 6°) for type 3, and 67.7° (SD: 10.8°) for type 4. ( Figure 2 ) The PI was statistically different between types 1 and 3 (p < 0.001), 1 and 4 (p < 0.001), 2 and 3 (p = 0.001), 2 and 4 (p < 0.001), and 3 and 4 (p < 0.001). ( Figure 3 ) There was no difference in PI between types 1 and 2 (p = 0.16). Table 2 Distribution of the PI and the LL according to Roussouly classification curve type. Classification PI LL L1-S1 L1-L2 L2-L3 L3-L4 L4-L5 L5-S1 Type 1 40.2° (9.4°) 47.4° (9.6°) -2° (2.3°) 3.9° (2.7°) 10°(4°) 15.9° (3.2°) 20.5° (4.9°) Type 2 46° (5.4°) 48.1° (7.8°) 0.1° (3.2°) 7.5° (3.4°) 10.6° (3.3°) 14.5° (4.5°) 16.4° (5.9°) Type 3 54.7° (6°) 59.4° (4.9°) 0.2° (3.2°) 7° (3.5°) 10.7° (3.8°) 17.9° (4°) 24.4° (6.4) Type 4 67.6° (10.8) 70.8° (8°) 1.9° (3°) 10.5° (4°) 14° (4.1°) 20.6° (5.4°) 25.3° (10.1°) Figure 2 Values of pelvic incidence (PI) according to the Roussouly classification. Figure 3 Comparison of the PI values among the Roussouly classification types through the ANOVA test. The value of the LL was significantly different between the Roussouly classification types (p < 0.001), with a mean PI value of 47.3° (SD: 9.5°) for type 1, 48.1° (SD: 7.8°) for type 2, 59.4° (SD: 4.9°) for type 3, and 70.8° (SD: 8.1°) for type 4. ( Figure 4 ) The PI was statistically different between types 1 and 3 (p < 0.001), 1 and 4 (p < 0.001), 2 and 3 (p < 0.001), 2 and 4 (p < 0.001), and 3 and 4 (p < 0.001). ( Figure 5 ) There was no difference in the LL between types 1 and 2 (p = 0.991). Figure 4 Lumbar lordosis L1-S1 (LL) values according to the Roussouly classification. Figure 5 Comparison of the LL values among the Roussouly classification types through the ANOVA test. Considering the Roussouly type 1 patients, lordosis of the distal segment of the lumbar spine (L4-S1) corresponded to 76.3% of the LL L1-S1 with the inflection point located at L2-L3. In the Roussouly type 2 patients, the lordosis between L4-S1 corresponded to 62% of the LL L1-S1 with the inflection point located at L1-L2. In the Roussouly type 3 patients, the lordosis between L4-S1 corresponded to 70.8% with the inflection point located at T12-L1. In the Roussouly type 4 patients, the lordosis between L4-S1 corresponded to 60.9% with the inflection point located at T12-L1. DISCUSSION It is well established that LL is dependent on the PI value and an increase in the PI value is directly proportional to the absolute value of the LL measured between L1-S1.14 However, in addition to the absolute value, a variation in the PI value also influences the behavior of the lumbar curvature, especially the extent of lordosis distribution. This concept was observed by Roussouly and was the basis for the classification system for the normal variants of sagittal spinal alignment presented.9 This study evaluated a sample of patients for spinopelvic sagittal alignment and classification according to the system proposed by Roussouly. Laouissat et al.10 investigated the accuracy of the Roussouly classification, in a study with 296 individuals. Comparing their results with the results of our study, type 1 was the least frequent in both (12% vs. 15.6%, respectively), while type 3 was the most common in both (46% vs. 42.4%). In the article cited, type 2 accounted for 22% while in our study type 2 accounted for 20%. Type 4 made up 20% of the population in the Laouissat et al. study and 22.2% in our study. Regarding the relationship between the radiographic parameters and the Roussouly classification, in this study we observed that the PI value was higher for types 3 and 4 than for types 1 and 2, with the Roussouly type 4 value being higher than that of type 3. This result agrees with what was published in the original article by Roussouly et al.,9 as well as with the Laouissat et al. article.10 Likewise, the LL L5-S1 value was higher in types 3 and 4, being higher in type 4 than in type 3, as compared to types 1 and 2, just as observed in the cited articles.9 , 10 The literature has shown that 2/3 of the total LL L1-S1 is located in the distal segment of the lumbar spine (L4-S1).9 , 15 Data from the present study showed that, in the total sample, segment L4-S1 was responsible for 67.2% of the LL L1-S1 value. Considering the different Roussouly classification types, the distribution of lordosis varied by lumbar segment: Type 1, with patients with low PI (mean 40°) and short lordosis, usually comprising three vertebrae, 76% of the LL L1-S1 being located between L4-S1; Type 2, also with low PI (46°) and a less pronounced lumbar curve (LL L1-S1 mean 48°), 62% of the LL L1-S1 located between L4-S1; Type 3, with a mean PI of 54°, with an increase in the number of vertebrae comprising the lordosis and 70% of the LL L1-S1 located between L4-S1; and Type 4, with a higher PI (mean 67°), a more pronounced and extensive LL (mean 70°), with 60% of the LL L1-S1 located between L4-S1. A recent study evaluated spinopelvic sagittal alignment considering a sample of 268 individuals.16 It was also observed that 67% of the lumbar lordosis was located between L4 and S1, similar to that observed in our study and the other published articles. Moreover, the correlation between LL and PI was analyzed and an arithmetic expression was obtained from the linear regression model in which LL L1-S1 = 0.54xPI + 27.6 (R = 0.56). Thus, they demonstrated that in patients with lower PI (PI < 50°) the value of LL is expected to be higher than the PI value, while in patients with higher PI it is expected that the LL value will be lower than that of the PI, respecting the concept presented in the article by Schwab et al. that LL = PI ± 9°.14 In our study, we also observed a strong correlation between PI and LL, and by the linear regression model the value of LL L1-S1 = 0.83xPI + 13, with R=0.89 and R2 =0.80 (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS This study presented an analysis of spinopelvic sagittal alignment in a sample of Brazilian patients and calculated the frequency distribution rate according to the Roussouly classification. The high correlation between PI and LL values was confirmed. We observed the important influence of the distal lumbar segment (L4-S1) in the overall values of LL L1-S1, even more significant in patients with lower PI (Roussouly types 1 and 2). REFERENCES 1 1. Glassman SD, Bridwell K, Dimar JR, Horton W, Berven S, Schwab F. The impact of positive sagittal balance in adult spinal deformity. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2005;30(18):2024–9. Glassman SD Bridwell K Dimar JR Horton W Berven S Schwab F The impact of positive sagittal balance in adult spinal deformity Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2005 30 18 2024 2029 2 2. Lafage V, Schwab F, Patel A, Hawkinson N, Farcy JP. Pelvic tilt and truncal inclination: two key radiographic parameters in the setting of adults with spinal deformity. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2009;34(17):E599–606. Lafage V Schwab F Patel A Hawkinson N Farcy JP Pelvic tilt and truncal inclination: two key radiographic parameters in the setting of adults with spinal deformity Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2009 34 17 E599 E606 3 3. Bess S, Line B, Fu KM, McCarthy I, Lafage V, Schwab F, et al. The health impact of symptomatic Adult Spinal Deformity: Comparison of deformity types to United States population norms and chronic diseases. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2016;41(3):224-33. Bess S Line B Fu KM McCarthy I Lafage V Schwab F et al The health impact of symptomatic Adult Spinal Deformity: Comparison of deformity types to United States population norms and chronic diseases Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2016 41 3 224 233 4 4. Pellisé F, Vila-Casademunt A, Ferrer M, Domingo-Sàbat M, Bagó J, Pérez-Grueso FJ, et al. Impact on health related quality of life of adult spinal deformity (ASD) compared with other chronic conditions. Eur Spine J. 2015;24(1):3–11. Pellisé F Vila-Casademunt A Ferrer M Domingo-Sàbat M Bagó J Pérez-Grueso FJ et al Impact on health related quality of life of adult spinal deformity (ASD) compared with other chronic conditions Eur Spine J 2015 24 1 3 11 5 5. Schwab FJ, Blondel B, Bess S, Hostin R, Shaffrey CI, Smith JS, et al. Radiographical spinopelvic parameters and disability in the setting of adult spinal deformity: a prospective multicenter analysis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2013;38(13):E803–12. Schwab FJ Blondel B Bess S Hostin R Shaffrey CI Smith JS et al Radiographical spinopelvic parameters and disability in the setting of adult spinal deformity: a prospective multicenter analysis Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2013 38 13 E803 E812 6 6. Pratali RR, Hennemann SA, Amaral R, Silva LECT, Carvalho MOP, Daher MT, et al. Standardized terminology of adult spine deformity for brazilian portuguese. Coluna/Columna. 2015;14(4):281-5. Pratali RR Hennemann SA Amaral R Silva LECT Carvalho MOP Daher MT et al Standardized terminology of adult spine deformity for brazilian portuguese Coluna/Columna 2015 14 4 281 285 7 7. Legaye J, Duval-Beaupère G, Hecquet J, Marty C. Pelvic incidence: a fundamental pelvic parameter for three-dimensional regulation of spinal sagittal curves. Eur Spine J. 1998;7(2):99-103. Legaye J Duval-Beaupère G Hecquet J Marty C Pelvic incidence: a fundamental pelvic parameter for three-dimensional regulation of spinal sagittal curves Eur Spine J 1998 7 2 99 103 8 8. Berthonnaud E, Dimnet J, Roussouly P, Labelle H. Analysis of the sagittal balance of the spine and pelvis using shape and orientation parameters. J Spinal Disord Tech. 2005;18(1):40–7. Berthonnaud E Dimnet J Roussouly P Labelle H Analysis of the sagittal balance of the spine and pelvis using shape and orientation parameters J Spinal Disord Tech 2005 18 1 40 47 9 9. Roussouly P, Gollogly S, Berthonnaud E, Dimnet J. Classification of the normal variation in the sagittal alignment of the human lumbar spine and pelvis in the standing position. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2005;30(3):346–53. Roussouly P Gollogly S Berthonnaud E Dimnet J Classification of the normal variation in the sagittal alignment of the human lumbar spine and pelvis in the standing position Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2005 30 3 346 353 10 10. Laouissat F, Sebaaly A, Gehrchen M, Roussouly P. Classification of normal sagittal spine alignment: refounding the Roussouly classification. Eur Spine J. 2018;27(8):2002-11. Laouissat F Sebaaly A Gehrchen M Roussouly P Classification of normal sagittal spine alignment: refounding the Roussouly classification Eur Spine J 2018 27 8 2002 2011 11 11. Glassman SD, Bridwell K, Dimar JR, Horton W, Berven S, Schwab F. The impact of positive sagittal balance in adult spinal deformity. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2005;30(18):2024-9. Glassman SD Bridwell K Dimar JR Horton W Berven S Schwab F The impact of positive sagittal balance in adult spinal deformity Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2005 30 18 2024 2029 12 12. Pratali RR, Nasreddine MA, Diebo B, Oliveira CEAS, Lafage V. Normal values for sagittal spinal alignment: a study of Brazilian subjects. Clinics (Sao Paulo). 2018;73:e647. Pratali RR Nasreddine MA Diebo B Oliveira CEAS Lafage V Normal values for sagittal spinal alignment: a study of Brazilian subjects Clinics (Sao Paulo) 2018 73 e647 13 13. Lafage R, Ferrero E, Henry JK, Challier V, Diebo B, Liabaud B, et al. Validation of a new computer-assisted tool to measure spino-pelvic parameters. Spine J. 2015;15(12):2493-502. Lafage R Ferrero E Henry JK Challier V Diebo B Liabaud B et al Validation of a new computer-assisted tool to measure spino-pelvic parameters Spine J 2015 15 12 2493 2502 14 14. Schwab F, Lafage V, Patel A, Farcy JP. Sagittal plane considerations and pelvis in the adult patient. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2009;34(17):1828-33. Schwab F Lafage V Patel A Farcy JP Sagittal plane considerations and pelvis in the adult patient Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2009 34 17 1828 1833 15 15. Janik TJ, Harrison DD, Cailliet R, Troyanovich SJ, Harrison DE. Can the sagittal lumbar curvature be closely approximated by an ellipse? J Orthop Res. 1998;16(6):766–70. Janik TJ Harrison DD Cailliet R Troyanovich SJ Harrison DE Can the sagittal lumbar curvature be closely approximated by an ellipse? J Orthop Res 1998 16 6 766 770 16 16. Le Huec JC, Hasegawa K. Normative values for the spine shape parameters using 3D standing analysis from a database of 268 asymptomatic Caucasian and Japanese subjects. Eur Spine J. 2016;25(11):3630-7. Le Huec JC Hasegawa K Normative values for the spine shape parameters using 3D standing analysis from a database of 268 asymptomatic Caucasian and Japanese subjects Eur Spine J 2016 25 11 3630 3637 Study conducted at the Orthopedics and Traumatology Service of the Hospital do Servidor Público Estadual de São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, Brazil.