Skip to main content
OrthoVellum
Knowledge Hub

Study

  • Topics
  • MCQs
  • ISAWE
  • Operative Surgery
  • Flashcards

Company

  • About Us
  • Editorial Policy
  • Contact
  • FAQ
  • Blog

Legal

  • Terms of Service
  • Privacy Policy
  • Cookie Policy
  • Medical Disclaimer
  • Copyright & DMCA
  • Refund Policy

Support

  • Help Center
  • Accessibility
  • Report an Issue
OrthoVellum

© 2026 OrthoVellum. For educational purposes only.

Not affiliated with the Royal Australasian College of Surgeons.

Adult Spinal Deformity

Back to Topics
Contents
0%

Adult Spinal Deformity

Comprehensive guide to adult spinal deformity including SRS-Schwab classification, sagittal balance parameters, surgical planning, osteotomies, and outcomes for orthopaedic exam

complete
Updated: 2025-12-24
High Yield Overview

ADULT SPINAL DEFORMITY - SAGITTAL BALANCE RECONSTRUCTION

SRS-Schwab Classification | PI-LL Mismatch | Osteotomies | Global Balance

PI-LLKey mismatch parameter
50mmSVA threshold for surgery
25-80%Complication rate range
30-40°PSO correction per level

SRS-SCHWAB MODIFIERS

PI-LL Mismatch
PatternDifference between pelvic incidence and lumbar lordosis
Treatment0: under 10°, +: 10-20°, ++: over 20°
Pelvic Tilt
PatternCompensatory pelvic retroversion
Treatment0: under 20°, +: 20-30°, ++: over 30°
SVA
PatternSagittal vertical axis from C7 plumb line
Treatment0: under 4cm, +: 4-9.5cm, ++: over 9.5cm
Curve Type
PatternPrimary coronal deformity pattern
TreatmentT, L, D, N types based on apex

Critical Must-Knows

  • PI-LL mismatch is the strongest predictor of disability
  • LL should match PI within 10 degrees (LL = PI ± 9)
  • SVA over 50mm strongly correlates with pain and disability
  • Pelvic retroversion is a compensatory mechanism (PT increases)
  • Age-adjusted goals may be appropriate for elderly patients

Examiner's Pearls

  • "
    PI is fixed - cannot be changed surgically
  • "
    PT increases as compensation for sagittal imbalance
  • "
    Global Alignment and Proportion (GAP) score predicts complications
  • "
    Three-column osteotomies (PSO, VCR) carry highest complication risk

Critical Adult Spinal Deformity Exam Points

PI-LL is King

PI-LL mismatch is the most important parameter correlating with health-related quality of life. Target: LL = PI ± 9 degrees. Every 1 degree of PI-LL mismatch beyond 10 degrees worsens ODI scores.

Know Your Osteotomies

SPO (Ponte): 5-10 degrees per level, posterior only. PSO: 30-40 degrees, through vertebral body. VCR: 45-70 degrees, complete vertebral resection. Know indications and complication profiles.

Compensation Cascade

When lumbar lordosis is lost, the body compensates: pelvic retroversion (PT increases), hip extension, knee flexion. Exhausted compensation leads to sagittal imbalance and positive SVA.

Complication Burden

ASD surgery has 25-80% complication rates. Major risks include: proximal junctional kyphosis (PJK), rod fracture, pseudarthrosis, neurological injury. Three-column osteotomies have highest risk.

SRS-Schwab Sagittal Modifiers

ModifierNon-pathological (0)Moderate (+)Marked (++)
PI-LL MismatchUnder 10°10-20°Over 20°
Pelvic Tilt (PT)Under 20°20-30°Over 30°
SVAUnder 4cm4-9.5cmOver 9.5cm

At a Glance

Adult spinal deformity (ASD) surgery aims to restore sagittal balance, with PI-LL mismatch being the strongest predictor of disability—target LL = PI ± 9 degrees. The SRS-Schwab classification uses three sagittal modifiers: PI-LL mismatch, pelvic tilt (PT), and sagittal vertical axis (SVA over 50mm correlates strongly with pain/disability). Pelvic incidence (PI) is fixed and cannot be changed; compensatory mechanisms include pelvic retroversion (increased PT), hip extension, and knee flexion. Osteotomy options include SPO/Ponte (5-10° per level, posterior only), PSO (30-40° through vertebral body), and VCR (45-70°, complete vertebral resection). ASD surgery has 25-80% complication rates including proximal junctional kyphosis (PJK), rod fracture, and pseudarthrosis, with three-column osteotomies carrying the highest risk.

Mnemonic

PI-LL - The Golden Formula

P
Pelvic Incidence
Fixed anatomical parameter (cannot change)
I
Is the target
LL should match PI
L
Lumbar Lordosis
Surgical goal - restore to match PI
L
Less than 10° mismatch
Target PI-LL under 10 degrees

Memory Hook:PI-LL mismatch predicts outcomes - aim for LL = PI ± 9 degrees

Mnemonic

SVA PT - Sagittal Parameters

S
Sagittal Vertical Axis
C7 plumb line to posterior S1
V
Vertical offset
Positive = anterior to S1
A
Abnormal over 50mm
Strong correlation with disability
P
Pelvic Tilt
Compensatory retroversion
T
Twenty degrees normal
Over 20 is pathological

Memory Hook:SVA and PT are key indicators of sagittal imbalance and compensation

Mnemonic

SPO PSO VCR - Osteotomy Ladder

S
SPO (Smith-Petersen)
5-10° per level, posterior only
P
PSO (Pedicle Subtraction)
30-40° per level, three-column
V
VCR (Vertebral Column Resection)
45-70°, complete resection

Memory Hook:Start with least invasive (SPO) and escalate as needed for correction

Overview and Epidemiology

Adult spinal deformity (ASD) encompasses a spectrum of conditions characterized by abnormal spinal curvature in adults, with increasing recognition of the importance of sagittal plane alignment. Unlike adolescent idiopathic scoliosis, ASD is predominantly a sagittal plane problem.

Types of Adult Spinal Deformity:

  • De novo degenerative scoliosis: Develops in adulthood due to asymmetric disc degeneration and facet arthropathy
  • Progressive idiopathic scoliosis: Adolescent scoliosis that progresses in adulthood
  • Iatrogenic deformity: Following prior spinal surgery (flatback syndrome, adjacent segment disease)
  • Secondary deformity: Due to metabolic bone disease, trauma, or infection

Clinical significance:

  • Sagittal imbalance correlates strongly with pain and disability
  • Health-related quality of life (HRQOL) measures (ODI, SF-36) correlate with sagittal parameters
  • SVA over 50mm is associated with significant disability
  • PI-LL mismatch is the strongest predictor of poor HRQOL

Epidemiological Shift

The prevalence of ASD increases dramatically with age. While scoliosis affects approximately 8% of adults over 40, the prevalence rises to 68% in those over 70. This represents a growing healthcare burden as the population ages.

Pathophysiology

Sagittal Balance Principles

The spine functions as a chain of segments that must maintain the center of gravity over the pelvis and lower extremities. Loss of lumbar lordosis is the primary driver of sagittal imbalance.

Normal Sagittal Alignment:

  • Cervical lordosis: 20-40 degrees
  • Thoracic kyphosis: 20-50 degrees (T4-T12)
  • Lumbar lordosis: 40-60 degrees (L1-S1)
  • Sacral slope: 30-50 degrees
  • Pelvic tilt: 10-25 degrees

Pelvic Parameters

Pelvic Incidence (PI):

  • Fixed anatomical parameter (does not change after skeletal maturity)
  • Angle between perpendicular to sacral endplate and line to femoral head center
  • Determines the amount of lumbar lordosis required for balance
  • PI = PT + SS (fundamental equation)
  • Normal range: 40-65 degrees

Pelvic Tilt (PT):

  • Positional parameter (changes with posture)
  • Angle between vertical and line from S1 midpoint to femoral head center
  • Increases with pelvic retroversion (compensation)
  • Normal: under 20 degrees
  • Over 30 degrees indicates exhausted compensation

Sacral Slope (SS):

  • Angle between sacral endplate and horizontal
  • Decreases with pelvic retroversion
  • SS = PI - PT

Compensation Cascade

When lumbar lordosis is insufficient for a given PI, a predictable cascade of compensation occurs:

Compensation Mechanisms:

StageMechanismClinical Effect
1Thoracic hypokyphosisReduces thoracic curve
2Pelvic retroversionIncreases PT, decreases SS
3Hip extensionExtends hip joint
4Knee flexionBent-knee gait
5DecompensationPositive SVA, disability

When compensation is exhausted, the C7 plumb line falls anterior to the sacrum (positive SVA) and the patient becomes symptomatic.

Classification Systems

SRS-Schwab Adult Spinal Deformity Classification

The SRS-Schwab classification is the most validated and widely used system for ASD. It combines coronal curve type with sagittal modifiers.

Coronal Curve Types:

SRS-Schwab Coronal Curve Types

TypeDescriptionApex Location
Type TThoracic onlyApex at T9 or higher
Type LThoracolumbar or lumbar onlyApex T10-L2 or L2-L4
Type DDouble curve (thoracic and lumbar)Both regions affected
Type NNo major coronal deformitySagittal plane only

Sagittal Modifiers:

The three sagittal modifiers each have three grades:

  • 0 (non-pathological): Normal range
  • + (moderate): Pathological but not severe
  • ++ (marked): Severely abnormal

The modifiers are validated to correlate with HRQOL outcomes.

Schwab Anatomic Osteotomy Classification

Schwab Osteotomy Classification

GradeProcedureCorrectionComplications
1Partial facetectomyMinimalLow
2Complete facetectomy (SPO/Ponte)5-10° per levelLow (2.1% neuro)
3Partial vertebral body resection (PSO)25-30°Moderate
4Through-disc PSO (BDBO)30-40°Moderate (9.1% neuro)
5Single-level VCR45-60°High (14.3% neuro)
6Multi-level VCR60-70°+Highest

This classification helps guide surgical planning based on the degree of correction needed.

Global Alignment and Proportion (GAP) Score

The GAP score was developed to predict mechanical complications and is based on individualized rather than population-based targets.

GAP Score Components:

  1. Relative pelvic version (RPV)
  2. Relative lumbar lordosis (RLL)
  3. Lordosis distribution index (LDI)
  4. Relative spinopelvic alignment (RSA)
  5. Age factor

Score Interpretation:

GAP ScoreRisk CategoryMechanical Complication Rate
0-2ProportionedLow
3-6Moderately disproportionedModerate
7-13Severely disproportionedHigh

The GAP score emphasizes that alignment goals should be individualized based on patient-specific factors.

Clinical Assessment

History

Key Symptoms:

  • Back pain (axial, often positional)
  • Radiculopathy or neurogenic claudication
  • Difficulty standing upright
  • Need to support trunk with hands on thighs
  • Decreased walking tolerance
  • Progressive postural change

Important History Elements:

  • Duration and progression of symptoms
  • Prior spinal surgery (fusion levels, approach)
  • Walking capacity (blocks, time)
  • Pain location and character
  • Neurological symptoms (weakness, numbness, bowel/bladder)
  • Medical comorbidities and bone health

Physical Examination

Observation:

  • Standing posture (sagittal and coronal)
  • Forward trunk lean
  • Hip and knee flexion posture
  • Shoulder balance

Spinal Assessment:

  • Spinal flexibility (forward bend test)
  • Sagittal balance (plumb line assessment)
  • Coronal balance
  • Chin-brow vertical angle (in fixed deformity)

Neurological Examination:

  • Motor strength (L2-S1 myotomes)
  • Sensory examination
  • Reflexes
  • Straight leg raise
  • Gait assessment

Global Assessment:

  • Hip range of motion (flexion contracture)
  • Knee examination
  • Overall mobility and function

Compensation Assessment

Assess the patient's compensatory mechanisms: Can they stand with hips and knees extended? If they require hip and knee flexion to stand upright, their pelvic compensation is exhausted and they likely have significant sagittal imbalance.

Patient-Reported Outcomes

Key Outcome Measures:

  • Oswestry Disability Index (ODI)
  • SF-36 (physical and mental component scores)
  • Scoliosis Research Society-22 (SRS-22)
  • Visual Analog Scale (VAS) for pain
  • EQ-5D

These measures correlate with sagittal parameters and are used to assess surgical outcomes.

Investigations

Imaging Algorithm

Step 1: Standing Full-Length Radiographs

  • 36-inch cassette standing AP and lateral
  • Include C2 to femoral heads
  • Arms positioned (hands on clavicles or in front)
  • Gold standard for alignment assessment

Step 2: Supine/Bending Radiographs

  • Assess flexibility of curves
  • Help plan fusion levels and osteotomy need
  • Supine lateral over bolster assesses sagittal flexibility

Step 3: MRI Whole Spine

  • Neural compression assessment
  • Disc degeneration evaluation
  • Rule out intraspinal pathology
  • Assess cord and cauda equina

Step 4: CT (When Indicated)

  • Bone quality assessment
  • Previous fusion mass evaluation
  • Hardware assessment
  • Osteotomy planning

Radiographic Measurements

Essential Measurements:

ParameterMeasurementNormal RangeSignificance
SVAC7 plumb to S1 posterior cornerUnder 50mmUnder 4cm optimal
PISacral endplate perpendicular to femoral head40-65°Fixed, determines LL target
PTVertical to femoral head-S1 lineUnder 20°Over 25° is compensation
SSSacral endplate to horizontal30-50°SS = PI - PT
LLL1 superior to S1 superior endplate40-60°Target: PI ± 9
TKT4-T12 (or T5-T12)20-50°Should balance LL
PI-LLDifference between PI and LLUnder 10°Key outcome predictor
T1PAT1 to femoral head angleUnder 14°Global alignment measure

Bone Density Assessment

  • DEXA scan (hip and spine)
  • Consider CT-based bone density (Hounsfield units)
  • Important for surgical planning and fixation strategy
  • Osteoporosis significantly increases complication risk

Additional Studies

  • CT myelogram if MRI contraindicated
  • Flexion-extension radiographs for instability
  • Standing hip-to-ankle films for limb length and hip assessment
  • Pulmonary function tests for severe deformity

Management

📊 Management Algorithm
adult spinal deformity management algorithm
Click to expand
Management algorithm for adult spinal deformityCredit: OrthoVellum

Non-Operative Management

Indications:

  • Mild deformity without significant symptoms
  • Patient preference or surgical contraindications
  • Adequate compensation with acceptable function
  • High surgical risk patients

Treatment Options:

  1. Physical Therapy

    • Core strengthening
    • Flexibility exercises
    • Postural training
    • Aerobic conditioning
  2. Pain Management

    • Analgesics (paracetamol, NSAIDs)
    • Neuropathic agents (gabapentin, pregabalin)
    • Epidural steroid injections (temporary)
    • Facet injections (diagnostic and therapeutic)
  3. Bracing

    • Limited role in adults
    • May provide temporary symptom relief
    • Does not prevent progression
    • Consider for high surgical risk patients
  4. Lifestyle Modification

    • Weight optimization
    • Smoking cessation
    • Activity modification
    • Assistive devices

Natural History

Untreated sagittal imbalance tends to progress over time due to continued disc degeneration and muscle fatigue. Curves with PI-LL mismatch over 20 degrees or SVA over 50mm are more likely to progress.

Surgical Indications

Absolute Indications:

  • Progressive neurological deficit
  • Severe, refractory pain with failed conservative treatment
  • Significant functional impairment

Relative Indications:

  • SVA over 50mm with symptoms
  • PI-LL mismatch over 10-15 degrees
  • Curve progression
  • Coronal imbalance over 4cm
  • Documented quality of life impairment

Surgical Goals:

  1. Restore sagittal balance (SVA under 50mm)
  2. Achieve appropriate PI-LL match (under 10 degrees)
  3. Decompress neural elements
  4. Achieve solid arthrodesis
  5. Maintain or improve coronal balance

Contraindications:

  • Severe medical comorbidities
  • Uncontrolled osteoporosis
  • Active infection
  • Patient unable to tolerate prolonged surgery
  • Unrealistic expectations

Careful patient selection is essential to optimize outcomes and minimize complications.

Osteotomy Selection

Smith-Petersen Osteotomy (SPO/Ponte):

Technique:

  • Posterior column resection only
  • Remove facets, lamina, ligamentum flavum
  • Correction through anterior disc space opening

Indications:

  • Long, gradual kyphosis (Scheuermann)
  • Mobile anterior disc
  • SVA 6-8cm positive
  • Need 5-10 degrees per level

Advantages:

  • Lower complication rate
  • Can do multiple levels
  • Less blood loss

Disadvantages:

  • Limited correction per level
  • Requires mobile disc anteriorly

Pedicle Subtraction Osteotomy (PSO):

Technique:

  • Three-column wedge osteotomy
  • Posterior elements, pedicles, and wedge of vertebral body removed
  • Anterior cortex used as hinge
  • Closes posteriorly for lordosis

Indications:

  • Sharp, angular kyphosis
  • Fixed anterior disc
  • SVA over 10cm positive
  • Need 30-40 degrees correction

Advantages:

  • Powerful correction at single level
  • No anterior lengthening (stable)
  • Works with fused anterior column

Disadvantages:

  • Higher complication rate (9% neurological)
  • Technically demanding
  • Risk of rod fracture at osteotomy

Vertebral Column Resection (VCR):

Technique:

  • Complete resection of one or more vertebral segments
  • All three columns removed
  • Maximum correction possible
  • Requires anterior and posterior stabilization

Indications:

  • Severe, rigid angular deformity
  • Combined coronal and sagittal deformity
  • Tumour resection
  • Need over 45 degrees correction

Advantages:

  • Maximum correction achievable
  • Can address multiplanar deformity

Disadvantages:

  • Highest complication rate (14% neurological)
  • Subluxation risk
  • Longest surgery, greatest blood loss

The choice of osteotomy depends on the magnitude of correction needed, location of deformity, and patient risk factors.

Surgical Planning

Level Selection:

  • Upper instrumented vertebra (UIV): Stable, horizontal vertebra
  • Lower instrumented vertebra (LIV): Stable foundation
  • Consider pelvic fixation for long constructs

Pelvic Fixation Indications:

  • Fusion to sacrum
  • Osteoporotic bone
  • Previous failed fusion
  • High PI-LL mismatch
  • Long constructs (over 5 levels to sacrum)

Alignment Targets:

ParameterTarget
PI-LLUnder 10 degrees
SVAUnder 50mm (under 4cm ideal)
PTUnder 20-25 degrees
C7 plumbBetween hip axes
T1PAUnder 14 degrees

Age-Adjusted Goals:

  • Elderly patients (over 75) may tolerate more SVA
  • Avoid over-correction in elderly (PJK risk)
  • Consider GAP score for individualized targets

Staging Considerations:

  • Single-stage vs. staged procedures
  • Anterior release before posterior correction
  • Interbody support at osteotomy site

Staging decisions depend on patient comorbidities, magnitude of correction needed, and surgical team experience. Staged procedures may reduce physiological stress but increase overall hospital stay.

Complications

Complication Overview

ASD surgery has significant complication rates (25-80% in various series). Understanding and communicating these risks is essential.

Complication Rates by Procedure

ComplicationSPOPSOVCR
Neurological2.1%9.1%14.3%
Overall major40%38%39%
Blood loss (L)1-22-43-6

Early Complications

ComplicationIncidenceManagement
Neurological deficit2-14%Monitoring, steroids, revision if progressive
Dural tear5-15%Primary repair, fibrin sealant
Infection5-10%Antibiotics, debridement
Haematoma2-5%Evacuation if symptomatic
Medical complications15-30%Appropriate specialty management
PE/DVT2-5%Prophylaxis, anticoagulation

Delayed Complications

Proximal Junctional Kyphosis (PJK):

  • Most common mechanical complication
  • Defined as over 10 degrees kyphosis at UIV
  • Risk factors: older age, over-correction, osteoporosis, upper thoracic UIV
  • May require extension of fusion

Rod Fracture:

  • Occurs in 5-20% of cases
  • Higher risk at osteotomy site
  • May be asymptomatic if fusion solid
  • Revision if painful or progressing

Pseudarthrosis:

  • Failure of fusion
  • Risk factors: smoking, diabetes, multilevel, previous failed fusion
  • Revision with bone grafting and possible osteotomy

Adjacent Segment Disease:

  • Degeneration above or below fusion
  • May require fusion extension
  • More common with long rigid constructs

Risk Factors for Complications

  • Advanced age (over 70)
  • Higher ASA grade
  • Obesity
  • Osteoporosis
  • Smoking
  • Three-column osteotomies
  • Revision surgery
  • Long operative time

Complication Counselling

All patients must be counselled about the significant complication risk. Major complications occur in approximately 40% of cases. Realistic expectations and shared decision-making are essential.

Postoperative Care

Immediate Postoperative

Day 0-3:

  • ICU or high-dependency monitoring for major cases
  • Drain management
  • Neurological monitoring (hourly initially)
  • VTE prophylaxis
  • Pain management (multimodal)
  • Early mobilisation when stable

Week 1-2:

  • Progressive mobilisation
  • Physiotherapy assessment
  • Wound surveillance
  • DVT screening if clinically indicated
  • Medical optimisation

Rehabilitation

PhaseTimeframeGoals
Phase 1Weeks 0-6Protected mobilisation, wound healing
Phase 2Weeks 6-12Increase activity, core activation
Phase 3Months 3-6Strengthening, return to light activities
Phase 4Beyond 6 monthsFull activity as tolerated

Bracing:

  • Variable practice (surgeon preference)
  • TLSO for 6-12 weeks in some protocols
  • May provide comfort and remind of precautions

Follow-up Protocol

TimepointAssessment
2 weeksWound check, early mobilisation
6 weeksClinical review, radiographs
3 monthsClinical and radiographic assessment
6 monthsFull-length films, HRQOL measures
12 monthsFusion assessment, outcome measures
AnnuallyLong-term surveillance

Imaging Schedule:

  • 6 weeks: AP and lateral
  • 3-6 months: Full-length standing films
  • 12 months: Fusion assessment (CT if concern)
  • Annual: As clinically indicated

Outcomes and Prognosis

Outcome Measures

Radiographic Outcomes:

  • SVA correction to under 50mm
  • PI-LL mismatch under 10 degrees
  • Coronal balance restoration
  • Fusion rate

Clinical Outcomes:

  • ODI improvement (MCID: 12-15 points)
  • VAS pain reduction (MCID: 2 points)
  • SRS-22 improvement
  • SF-36 improvement

Expected Outcomes

Successful Surgery (Approximate Rates):

  • SVA correction achieved: 70-85%
  • Fusion rate: 85-95%
  • Significant pain improvement: 60-75%
  • Patient satisfaction: 70-80%

Factors Affecting Outcomes:

  • Baseline deformity severity
  • Adequate correction (PI-LL match)
  • Complication occurrence
  • Patient age and comorbidities
  • Revision vs. primary surgery

Long-term Prognosis

Favourable Factors:

  • Achievement of alignment goals
  • No major complications
  • Younger patient age
  • Good bone quality
  • Non-smoker

Less Favourable Factors:

  • Under-correction of deformity
  • Over-correction (PJK risk)
  • Major complication occurrence
  • Revision surgery
  • Ongoing smoking

Outcomes Summary

The most consistent predictor of good outcomes is achieving appropriate PI-LL match (under 10 degrees mismatch). Under-correction is associated with persistent symptoms, while over-correction increases PJK risk.

Evidence and Guidelines

PI-LL Mismatch and Outcomes

Level II-III
Key Findings:
  • PI-LL mismatch strongly correlates with ODI scores
  • Every 1 degree mismatch beyond 10 worsens outcomes
  • SVA over 47mm associated with significant disability
  • PT over 22 degrees indicates compensation
Clinical Implication: Target PI-LL mismatch under 10 degrees and SVA under 50mm
Source: Schwab et al. Spine 2009; Multiple validation studies

Osteotomy Complication Rates

Level III
Key Findings:
  • SPO neurological complication rate 2.1%
  • PSO neurological complication rate 9.1%
  • VCR neurological complication rate 14.3%
  • Overall major complication rates 38-40%
Clinical Implication: Higher correction osteotomies carry higher complication risk
Source: Smith et al. Spine Deformity 2014

Age-Adjusted Alignment Goals

Level III
Key Findings:
  • Normative alignment values change with age
  • PT increases and LL decreases with normal aging
  • Over-correction in elderly increases PJK risk
  • Individualized targets may improve outcomes
Clinical Implication: Consider age-adjusted goals, especially in patients over 70
Source: Lafage et al. Spine 2017; Multiple studies

GAP Score Validation

Level III
Key Findings:
  • GAP score predicts mechanical complications
  • Proportioned score (0-2) has lowest complication rate
  • Accounts for individual variation in pelvic anatomy
  • Better discrimination than fixed targets alone
Clinical Implication: GAP score may help individualize surgical planning
Source: Yilgor et al. Lancet 2017

Exam Viva Scenarios

Practice these scenarios to excel in your viva examination

VIVA SCENARIOStandard

Classic Adult Spinal Deformity Presentation

EXAMINER

"A 65-year-old woman presents with progressive difficulty standing upright and lower back pain. She reports needing to lean on a shopping trolley to walk. Examination shows forward trunk lean with hip and knee flexion. Full-length radiographs show SVA of 12cm, PI of 55 degrees, LL of 20 degrees, and PT of 35 degrees."

EXCEPTIONAL ANSWER
**Opening Statement:** "This patient has adult spinal deformity with severe sagittal imbalance. The key finding is a PI-LL mismatch of 35 degrees (PI 55 - LL 20) and significantly positive SVA of 12cm. The elevated PT of 35 degrees indicates exhausted pelvic compensation." **Assessment:** 1. Calculate spinopelvic parameters 2. Assess flexibility with supine films 3. MRI for neural compression 4. DEXA for bone density 5. Medical optimisation assessment 6. Patient-reported outcome measures **Key Calculations:** - PI-LL mismatch: 55 - 20 = 35 degrees (severely abnormal) - Target LL: PI ± 9 = 55 ± 9 = 46-64 degrees - LL correction needed: 46 - 20 = 26 degrees minimum **Surgical Planning:** "Given the PI-LL mismatch of 35 degrees, I need to restore approximately 35 degrees of lordosis to achieve appropriate alignment. Options include: 1. Multiple SPOs (5-10 degrees each) - would need 4-6 levels 2. Single PSO (30-40 degrees) - most efficient 3. Combination approach I would favor a PSO at L3 or L4 to restore lordosis in a single powerful correction, combined with decompression as needed and long fusion with pelvic fixation." **Alignment Goals:** - SVA under 50mm - PI-LL under 10 degrees - PT under 25 degrees
KEY POINTS TO SCORE
Calculate PI-LL mismatch (35 degrees = severely abnormal)
Elevated PT indicates exhausted compensation
PSO most efficient for large correction
Know target alignment parameters
COMMON TRAPS
✗Forgetting to calculate PI-LL mismatch
✗Not recognising exhausted compensation (high PT)
✗Under-estimating correction needed
✗Not discussing pelvic fixation need
LIKELY FOLLOW-UPS
"What level would you perform the PSO at?"
"How would you address osteoporosis in this patient?"
"What is your fusion extent and why?"
"What complications would you counsel about?"
VIVA SCENARIOChallenging

Proximal Junctional Kyphosis

EXAMINER

"A 70-year-old man underwent T10-pelvis fusion for adult spinal deformity 6 months ago. He presents with new thoracic pain and difficulty standing. Radiographs show 25 degrees of kyphosis at T9-10 compared to immediate postoperative films."

EXCEPTIONAL ANSWER
**Opening Statement:** "This patient has proximal junctional kyphosis (PJK), defined as greater than 10 degrees of kyphosis development at the level immediately above the UIV. At 25 degrees, this represents significant PJK that is likely symptomatic." **Assessment:** 1. Compare current films to immediate postoperative 2. Assess for fracture at UIV or UIV+1 3. Evaluate overall sagittal balance 4. Check for hardware failure 5. Assess neurological status 6. CT scan to evaluate bone and hardware **Classification:** - PJK: Over 10 degrees kyphosis development - PJF (proximal junctional failure): Requires revision surgery **Risk Factors:** - Age over 60 (present) - Osteoporosis - Over-correction of sagittal alignment - Upper thoracic UIV - Posterior-only surgery **Management Options:** 1. Observation if stable and minimally symptomatic 2. Bracing for comfort 3. Extension of fusion proximally if: - Progressive kyphosis - Fracture present - Neurological symptoms - Significant pain **Revision Surgery:** "If revision is indicated, I would extend fusion to T4 or T2 (stable horizontal vertebra), consider hooks or cement augmentation at new UIV, address any fracture, and potentially add anterior column support." **Prevention Discussion:** "PJK prevention strategies include appropriate alignment targets (avoid over-correction), cement augmentation in osteoporotic bone, consideration of upper thoracic or cervical extension in high-risk patients, and tethers or hooks at UIV."
KEY POINTS TO SCORE
Define PJK (over 10 degrees kyphosis above UIV)
Identify risk factors in this patient
Distinguish observation vs. revision indications
Know prevention strategies
COMMON TRAPS
✗Not recognising PJK pattern
✗Operating on all PJK regardless of symptoms
✗Not looking for fracture on CT
✗Extending fusion short (should go to stable upper thoracic level)
LIKELY FOLLOW-UPS
"How would you prevent PJK in future cases?"
"What is the role of cement augmentation?"
"How far proximally would you extend fusion?"
"What is the recurrence rate after revision?"
VIVA SCENARIOChallenging

Osteotomy Selection

EXAMINER

"A 55-year-old woman has flatback syndrome following L4-S1 fusion performed 10 years ago. Her current LL is 10 degrees and PI is 60 degrees. SVA is 8cm positive. She has no radicular symptoms."

EXCEPTIONAL ANSWER
**Opening Statement:** "This patient has iatrogenic flatback syndrome with a PI-LL mismatch of 50 degrees (PI 60 - LL 10). She needs significant lordosis restoration - approximately 40-50 degrees to achieve appropriate alignment." **Correction Needed:** - Target LL: PI ± 9 = 51-69 degrees - Current LL: 10 degrees - Correction needed: 41-59 degrees **Osteotomy Options Analysis:** 1. **SPO (Ponte) - Not suitable** - Would need 5-8 levels for adequate correction - Previous fusion at L4-S1 prevents SPO there - Insufficient alone for this magnitude 2. **PSO - Preferred option** - 30-40 degrees per level - Can be done through fused segment - Single level may be sufficient - Would perform at L3 (just above fusion) 3. **VCR - Reserved if PSO insufficient** - Higher complication rate - Not first-line choice here **Surgical Plan:** "I would recommend L3 PSO with extension of fusion to T10 and pelvic fixation: 1. L3 PSO for 35-40 degrees correction 2. Takedown of previous fusion mass 3. Extend fusion to T10 for stable construct 4. Iliac or S2AI screws for pelvic fixation 5. Consider interbody support at L2-3 and L5-S1" **Expected Outcome:** - Target LL: 50-60 degrees - PI-LL mismatch under 10 degrees - SVA under 50mm
KEY POINTS TO SCORE
Calculate exact correction needed
Know SPO gives 5-10 degrees, PSO 30-40 degrees
Previous fusion affects osteotomy options
PSO at L3 (just above previous fusion)
COMMON TRAPS
✗Choosing SPO for large correction
✗Attempting PSO through L5-S1 (fused segment)
✗Not extending fusion proximally
✗Forgetting pelvic fixation
LIKELY FOLLOW-UPS
"What if PSO only achieves 30 degrees correction?"
"How would you address a pseudarthrosis at L5-S1?"
"What is your blood loss estimate for this case?"
"Would you consider anterior surgery?"

MCQ Practice Points

PI-LL Relationship

Q: What is the target PI-LL relationship in adult spinal deformity surgery?

A: PI-LL mismatch should be less than 10 degrees (LL = PI ± 9). PI is fixed and determines the lumbar lordosis required for sagittal balance. Every degree of mismatch beyond 10 degrees correlates with worsened quality of life scores.

SVA Threshold

Q: What SVA value correlates with significant disability in adult spinal deformity?

A: SVA over 50mm (or 5cm) is strongly associated with pain and disability. The SRS-Schwab classification uses 4cm and 9.5cm as thresholds for moderate and marked sagittal imbalance respectively.

Osteotomy Correction

Q: What correction is expected from each type of osteotomy?

A: SPO (Ponte): 5-10 degrees per level (posterior only, requires mobile disc). PSO: 30-40 degrees (three-column, through vertebral body). VCR: 45-70 degrees (complete vertebral resection, highest risk).

Pelvic Compensation

Q: What indicates exhausted pelvic compensation in sagittal imbalance?

A: Pelvic tilt (PT) over 25-30 degrees indicates that pelvic retroversion is maximized. When PT is high and SVA is still positive, the patient has exhausted compensation mechanisms and typically requires surgical correction.

PJK Definition

Q: How is proximal junctional kyphosis (PJK) defined?

A: PJK is defined as greater than 10 degrees of kyphosis developing at the level immediately above the upper instrumented vertebra (UIV), compared to immediate postoperative radiographs. It is the most common mechanical complication of ASD surgery.

Australian Context

Epidemiology

Adult spinal deformity affects a significant proportion of the Australian population, with prevalence increasing with age. As Australia's population ages, the burden of ASD is expected to grow substantially.

Management Considerations

Australian practice aligns with international standards for ASD management. Complex ASD surgery is generally performed at tertiary spinal units with experienced multidisciplinary teams. The high complication rates and resource requirements necessitate careful patient selection and surgical planning.

Access to specialized imaging, intraoperative monitoring, and intensive care facilities is essential for safe ASD surgery. Rural and regional patients often require transfer to metropolitan centres for definitive management.

Referral Pathways

Patients with suspected ASD should be referred to a spinal surgeon with experience in deformity correction. Comprehensive assessment including full-length standing radiographs and patient-reported outcome measures is standard. Multidisciplinary involvement including anaesthesia, rehabilitation, and medical specialists optimizes outcomes in this high-risk population.

ADULT SPINAL DEFORMITY

High-Yield Exam Summary

Key Parameters

  • •PI-LL mismatch: Target under 10 degrees (LL = PI ± 9)
  • •SVA: Under 50mm (positive = anterior to S1)
  • •PT: Under 20-25 degrees (over 25 = compensation)
  • •PI = PT + SS (fundamental equation)

Osteotomy Selection

  • •SPO (Ponte): 5-10 degrees per level, requires mobile disc
  • •PSO: 30-40 degrees, three-column, fixed deformity
  • •VCR: 45-70 degrees, maximum correction, highest risk
  • •Choose based on correction needed and flexibility

Complications

  • •PJK: Most common mechanical complication (over 10 degrees above UIV)
  • •Neurological: SPO 2%, PSO 9%, VCR 14%
  • •Overall major: 40% across all osteotomies
  • •Risk factors: age, osteoporosis, three-column osteotomy

Surgical Goals

  • •Restore SVA to under 50mm
  • •Achieve PI-LL under 10 degrees
  • •Reduce PT to under 25 degrees
  • •Consider age-adjusted targets for elderly

Exam Triggers

  • •Cannot stand upright = sagittal imbalance
  • •High PT with positive SVA = exhausted compensation
  • •Prior fusion + flatback = consider PSO
  • •New kyphosis above fusion = PJK
Quick Stats
Reading Time84 min
Related Topics

ACDF - Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion

Adjacent Segment Disease

Ankylosing Spondylitis

Cauda Equina Syndrome