Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Advance Online Publication
    • Archive
  • About Us
    • About ISASS
    • About the Journal
    • Author Instructions
    • Editorial Board
    • Reviewer Guidelines & Publication Criteria
  • More
    • Advertise
    • Subscribe
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
  • Join Us
  • Reprints & Permissions
  • Sponsored Content
  • Other Publications
    • ijss

User menu

  • My alerts

Search

  • Advanced search
International Journal of Spine Surgery
  • My alerts
International Journal of Spine Surgery

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Advance Online Publication
    • Archive
  • About Us
    • About ISASS
    • About the Journal
    • Author Instructions
    • Editorial Board
    • Reviewer Guidelines & Publication Criteria
  • More
    • Advertise
    • Subscribe
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
  • Join Us
  • Reprints & Permissions
  • Sponsored Content
  • Follow ijss on Twitter
  • Visit ijss on Facebook
Research ArticleCervical Spine

Perioperative Change in Cervical Lordosis and Health-Related Quality-of-Life Outcomes

Jose A. Canseco, Brian A. Karamian, Parthik D. Patel, Michael Markowitz, Joseph K. Lee, Mark F. Kurd, D. Greg Anderson, Jeffrey A. Rihn, Alan S. Hilibrand, Christopher K. Kepler, Alexander R. Vaccaro and Gregory D. Schroeder
International Journal of Spine Surgery December 2022, 16 (6) 960-968; DOI: https://doi.org/10.14444/8325
Jose A. Canseco
1 Rothman Orthopaedic Institute at Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA, USA
MD, PHD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Brian A. Karamian
1 Rothman Orthopaedic Institute at Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA, USA
MD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: brian.karamian@rothmanortho.com
Parthik D. Patel
1 Rothman Orthopaedic Institute at Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA, USA
MD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Michael Markowitz
1 Rothman Orthopaedic Institute at Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA, USA
DO
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Joseph K. Lee
1 Rothman Orthopaedic Institute at Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA, USA
MD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Mark F. Kurd
1 Rothman Orthopaedic Institute at Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA, USA
MD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
D. Greg Anderson
1 Rothman Orthopaedic Institute at Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA, USA
MD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Jeffrey A. Rihn
1 Rothman Orthopaedic Institute at Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA, USA
MD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Alan S. Hilibrand
1 Rothman Orthopaedic Institute at Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA, USA
MD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Christopher K. Kepler
1 Rothman Orthopaedic Institute at Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA, USA
MD, MBA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Alexander R. Vaccaro
1 Rothman Orthopaedic Institute at Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA, USA
MD, PHD, MBA
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Gregory D. Schroeder
1 Rothman Orthopaedic Institute at Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA, USA
MD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Article Figures & Data

Figures

  • Tables
  • Figure
    • Download figure
    • Open in new tab
    • Download powerpoint
    Figure

    Example pre- and postoperative lateral x-ray images for each group.

Tables

  • Figures
    • View popup
    Table 1

    Baseline characteristics.

    CharacteristicMaintained (n = 177)Restored (n = 101)Kyphotic (n = 30) P Valuea,b
    Age57.0 (59.5, 65.0)57.0 (49.0, 63.0)52.5 (45.5, 68.7)0.18
    Sex 0.02
     Female86 (48.6%)39 (38.6%)20 (66.7%)
     Male91 (51.4%)62 (61.4%)10 (33.3%)
    Body mass index28.7 (25.6, 32.6)29.5 (27.1, 34.7)27.7 (24.9, 31.4)0.07
    Smoking status0.59
     Never smoker117 (66.1%)64 (63.4%)23 (76.7%)
     Former smoker39 (22.0%)27 (26.7%)6 (20.0%)
     Current smoker21 (11.9%)10 (9.9%)1 (3.3%)
    Charlson Comorbidity Index2.0 (1.0, 3.0)2.0 (1.0, 3.0)1.0 (0.7, 2.0)0.17
    Preoperative diagnosis0.52
     Radiculopathy90 (50.8%)49 (48.5%)19 (63.4%)
     Myelopathy73 (41.2%)46 (45.5%)10 (33.3%)
     Myeloradiculopathy14 (7.9%)6 (5.9%)1 (3.3%)
    Levels fused0.28
     158 (32.8%)35 (34.7%)8 (26.7%)
     258 (32.8%)42 (41.6%)10 (33.3%)
     361 (34.5%)24 (23.8%)12 (40.0%)
    Preoperative C2-C7 Cobb angle8.9 (7.5, 9.7)−5.6 (−6.5, −4.8)−7.2 (−9.0, −5.4) <0.001
    Postoperative C2-C7 Cobb angle12.3 (13.3, 11.2)8.2 (4.6, 13.8)−6.2 (−8.5, −5.2) <0.001
    Follow-up14.6 (12.1, 18.3)14.8 (12.6, 19.5)16.2 (12.0, 21.1)0.28
    • Note: Significance achieved at P < 0.05.

    • ↵a Independent samples t test or Mann-Whitney U test for continuous variables.

    • ↵b Pearson χ 2 test for categorical variables.

    • View popup
    Table 2

    Health-related quality-of-life outcomes stratified by postoperative correction of cervical lordosis.

    Outcome MeasureMaintained
    (n = 177)
    Restored
    (n = 101)
    Kyphotic
    (n = 30)
    P Valuea
    Physical component of short form-12    
     Preoperative32.6 (30.2, 35.0)35.5 (32.0, 39.0)35.0 (28.1, 41.9)0.32
     Postoperative41.6 (38.4, 44.8)45.8 (41.9, 49.6)36.6 (29.1, 44.1)0.02
     Delta9.0 (5.4, 12.6)10.3 (7.0, 13.5)1.5 (−7.8, 10.8)0.04
     P value<0.001<0.0010.01 
    Mental component of short form-12    
     Preoperative49.0 (45.3, 52.7)46.7 (43.0, 50.3)49.1 (41.7, 56.5)0.86
     Postoperative50.8 (47.2, 54.3)45.2 (38.8, 51.6)51.4 (43.5, 59.3)0.73
     Delta1.8 (−2.8, 6.3)−1.4 (−7.7, 4.9)2.3 (−5.8, 10.3)0.68
     P value0.040.220.07 
    Neck Disability Index    
     Preoperative36.8 (31.6, 42.0)43.0 (34.7, 51.4)35.6 (28.8, 42.4)0.65
     Postoperative23.8 (17.6, 30.2)28.0 (18.2, 37.8)17.4 (8.8, 26.0)0.65
     Delta−13.0 (−19.8, −6.1)−14.8 (−27.0, −2.6)−18.2 (−25.8, −10.5)0.89
     P value<0.001<0.0010.002 
    VAS arm    
     Preoperative3.3 (2.1, 4.4)5.3 (3.8, 6.8)2.8 (0.9, 4.9)0.02
     Postoperative2.3 (1.3, 3.3)1.5 (0.6, 2.4)2.3 (0.6, 4.1)0.93
     Delta−0.9 (−2.0, 0.1)−3.8 (−5.1, −2.6)−0.6 (−2.8, 1.5)0.03
     P value<0.001<0.0010.01 
    VAS neck    
     Preoperative5.1 (4.1, 6.1)5.3 (4.0, 6.6)6.4 (5.4, 7.3)0.31
     Postoperative2.2 (1.3, 3.1)2.0 (0.7, 3.2)3.5 (1.0, 6.1)0.23
     Delta−2.9 (−4.3, −1.5)−3.3 (−5.0, −1.7)−2.8 (−5.2, −0.4)0.26
     P value<0.001<0.0010.002 
    • Abbreviation: VAS, visual analog scale.

    • Note: Significance achieved at P < 0.05.

    • ↵a Multiple linear regression analysis was done between groups controlling for age, body mass index, Charlson Comorbidity Index, and preoperative diagnosis.

    • View popup
    Table 3

    Regression analysis comparing correction of cervical lordosis and health-related quality-of-life outcomes.

    Outcome Measure β Coefficient95% CI P Valuea
    Physical component of short form-12 
     Maintained : restored−1.5(−5.8, 2.7)0.19
     Restored : kyphotic8.6(3.9, 13.3)0.03
     Maintained : kyphotic4.2(−0.7, 9.1)0.17
    Mental component of short form-12 
     Maintained : restored1.1(−2.9, 5.0)0.50
     Restored : kyphotic−3.2(−9.7, 3.4)0.54
     Maintained : kyphotic−2.2(−8.5, 3.9)0.76
    Neck Disability Index 
     Maintained : restored1.7(−8.6, 5.2)0.71
     Restored : kyphotic5.6(−5.8, 17.2)0.82
     Maintained : kyphotic7.6(−3.2, 18.5)0.62
    VAS arm 
     Maintained : restored1.9(−0.1, 2.9)0.27
     Restored : kyphotic−2.0(−3.7, −0.4)0.03
     Maintained : kyphotic−1.2(−2.7, 0.4)0.11
    VAS neck 
     Maintained : restored0.3(−1.4, 1.9)0.22
     Restored : kyphotic−0.5(−1.5, 0.5)0.12
     Maintained : kyphotic−0.8(−2.3, 0.8)0.33
    • Abbreviation: VAS, visual analog scale.

    • Note: Significance achieved at P < 0.05.

    • ↵a Regression analysis controlled for age, body mass index, Charlson Comorbidity Index, and preoperative diagnosis.

    • View popup
    Table 4

    Health-related quality-of-life outcomes in patients with preoperative cervical lordosis less than 0° (kyphotic).

    Outcome Measure1-Level
    (n = 43)
    2-Level
    (n = 51)
    3-Level
    (n = 36)
    P ValueRegression Analysisa
    Physical component of short form-12 
     Preoperative34.4(31.1, 37.836.0 (33.0, 38.9)34.4 (31.4, 37.3)0.87β: 0.03 (−1.96, 2.02) P = 0.98
     Postoperative42.4 (39.2, 45.7)42.4 (39.3, 45.5)42.4 (39.6, 45.2)0.95
     Delta7.8 (5.5, 10.0)7.9 (5.5, 10.3)7.5 (4.0, 11.0)0.99
     P value<0.001<0.001<0.001 
    Mental component of short form-12 
     Preoperative50.5 (47.2, 53.7)50.8 (47.8, 53.8)48.1 (44.3, 51.9)0.52β: 1.06 (−2.04, 4.16) P = 0.50
     Postoperative51.9 (48.5, 55.4)49.9 (46.3, 53.5)52.6 (49.0, 56.3)0.53
     Delta1.5 (−1.9, 5.0)0.8 (−3.6, 5.1)3.9 (−1.3, 9.0)0.65
     P value0.350.550.08 
    Neck Disability Index 
     Preoperative39.7 (32.8, 46.5)33.4 (27.7, 39.1)38.4 (33.1, 43.8)0.37β: 0.76 (−7.89, 9.41) P = 0.86
     Postoperative35.8 (15.6, 56.0)22.3 (15.3, 29.4)23.3 (16.2, 30.3)0.39
     Delta−15.5 (−29.1, −2.0)−16.7 (−28.6, −4.9)−15.6 (−27.1, −4.0)0.52
     P value0.010.010.001 
    VAS arm 
     Preoperative4.6 (3.7, 5.5)5.0 (4.1, 5.9)4.2 (2.6, 5.8)0.62β: 0.37 (−0.40, 1.14) P = 0.34
     Postoperative2.4 (1.5, 3.2)2.5 (1.8, 3.3)1.8 (1.0, 2.6)0.33
     Delta−3.1 (−3.9, −2.4)−3.1 (−4.1, −2.2)−2.4 (−4.2, −0.7)0.60
     P value<0.001<0.0010.01 
    VAS neck 
     Preoperative4.5 (3.5, 5.4)5.0 (3.9, 6.1)5.8 (4.7, 7.0)0.29β: 0.31 (−0.61, 1.23) P = 0.50
     Postoperative1.5 (0.7, 2.2)1.6 (0.8, 2.4)3.0 (1.8, 4.2) 0.01
     Delta−3.4 (−4.5, −2.2)−3.1 (−4.2, −2.0)−2.7 (−4.4, −0.9)0.76
     P value<0.001<0.0010.01 
    • Abbreviation: VAS, visual analog scale.

    • Note: Significance achieved at P < 0.05.

    • ↵a Regression analysis controlled for age, body mass index, Charlson Comorbidity Index, and preoperative diagnosis.

    • View popup
    Table 5

    Health-related quality-of-life outcomes in patients with preoperative cervical lordosis between 0° and 10° (neutral).

    Outcome Measure1-Level
    (n = 40)
    2-Level
    (n = 42)
    3-Level
    (n = 32)
    P ValueRegression Analysisa
    Physical component of short form-12 
     Preoperative34.5 (30.6, 38.4)32.7 (30.4, 35.0)35.2 (32.2, 38.1)0.43β: −2.91 (−6.26, 0.43) P = 0.09
     Postoperative44.8 (41.0, 48.6)39.1 (35.9, 42.2)38.8 (35.7, 42.0)0.02
     Delta11.3 (5.8, 16.7)6.8 (3.2, 10.5)5.1 (1.3, 8.9)0.16
     P value<0.0010.0010.02 
    Mental component of short form-12 
     Preoperative49.3 (44.4, 54.1)52.6 (48.7, 56.5)49.8 (45.7, 53.9)0.27β: −0.02 (−3.86, 3.83) P = 0.99
     Postoperative52.3 (48.1, 56.4)52.2 (49.0, 55.4)50.0 (45.7, 54.3)0.40
     Delta2.3 (−3.6, 8.3)0.2 (−3.1, 3.4)2.4 (−4.1, 9.1)0.84
     P value0.490.850.76 
    Neck Disability Index 
     Preoperative44.2 (36.6, 51.8)43.4 (36.5, 50.3)34.7 (29.4, 40.0)0.11β: 3.40 (−2.81, 9.60) P = 0.27
     Postoperative26.5 (6.1, 47.0)52.4 (15.2, 79.3)22.6 (17.0, 28.2)0.09
     Delta−23.6 (−34.9, −12.3)−14.9 (−55.5, 25.8)−14.2 (−20.1, −8.2)0.35
     P value0.0270.29<0.001 
    VAS arm 
     Preoperative4.7 (3.7, 5.7)6.1 (5.2, 7.1)2.5 (1.1, 3.9)<0.001β: 0.50 (−0.47, 1.47) P = 0.31
     Postoperative2.4 (1.4, 3.5)3.2 (2.0, 4.4)2.4 (1.4, 3.5)0.56
     Delta−2.5 (−3.6, −1.4)−4.2 (−5.4, −2.9)−0.9 (−2.4, 0.5)0.003
     P value0.001<0.0010.55 
    VAS neck 
     Preoperative4.8 (3.7, 5.9)6.5 (5.4, 7.4)4.8 (3.3, 6.2)0.10β: 0.43 (−0.59, 1.45) P = 0.40
     Postoperative0.9 (0.3, 1.6)1.7 (0.7, 2.7)2.9 (1.8, 4.0)0.001
     Delta−3.9 (−5.1, −2.8)−5.2 (−6.5, −3.9)−2.5 (−4.2, −0.7)0.03
     P value<0.001<0.0010.07 
    • Abbreviation: VAS, visual analog scale.

    • Note: Significance achieved at P < 0.05.

    • ↵a Regression analysis controlled for age, body mass index, Charlson Comorbidity Index, and preoperative diagnosis.

    • View popup
    Table 6

    Health-related quality-of-life outcomes in patients with preoperative cervical lordosis greater than 10° (lordotic).

    Outcome Measure1-Level
    (n = 18)
    2-Level
    (n = 17)
    3-Level
    (n = 29)
    P ValueRegression Analysisa
    Physical component of short form-12 
     Preoperative33.6 (28.7, 38.5)31.5 (28.3, 34.8)30.1 (25.2, 34.9)0.78β: 2.09 (−2.56, 6.75) P = 0.37
     Postoperative37.0 (30.5, 43.6)40.9 (35.8, 45.9)36.9 (32.3, 41.5)0.47
     Delta3.6 (−2.2, 9.4)8.7 (2.8, 14.6)6.0 (−0.5, 12.5)0.57
     P value0.200.010.01 
    Mental component of short form-12 
     Preoperative48.1 (42.2, 54.1)49.3 (44.6, 54.0)47.1 (40.5, 53.6)0.96β: −1.14 (−6.15, 3.87) P = 0.65
     Postoperative53.0 (47.5, 58.5)56.4 (51.9, 60.9)50.7 (46.3, 55.1)0.15
     Delta3.6 (−5.0, 12.2)6.4 (0.3, 12.6)4.1 (−1.7, 9.8)0.64
     P value0.400.040.31 
    Neck Disability Index 
     Preoperative41.1 (28.3, 53.9)34.4 (26.0, 42.7)34.2 (27.5, 40.9)0.64β: 5.14 (−12.21, 22.49) P = 0.53
     Postoperative18.5 (−24.1, 61.1)19.0 (0.4, 45.7)26.2 (16.6, 35.7)0.62
     Delta−21.3 (−49.6, 6.9)−19.0 (−41.0, −0.2)−7.9 (−25.6, 9.8)0.70
     P value0.110.180.02 
    VAS arm 
     Preoperative6.4 (4.8, 7.6)6.7 (5.6, 7.7)2.9 (1.1, 4.9)0.01β: 0.99 (−0.44, 2.42) P = 0.17
     Postoperative2.7 (1.3, 4.0)2.2 (0.6, 3.8)1.7 (0.5, 2.9)0.20
     Delta−4.2 (–5.8, –2.6)–5.5 (–7.4, –3.7)–1.3 (–3.6, 0.7)0.01
     P value0.0030.020.58 
    VAS neck 
     Preoperative6.1 (4.5, 7.8)5.7 (3.7, 7.8)4.8 (3.1, 6.5)0.29β: 0.79 (−0.78, 2.36) P = 0.31
     Postoperative0.6 (−0.1, 1.3)1.0 (−0.1, 2.1)2.2 (1.1, 3.4)0.04
     Delta–5.5 (–7.1, –3.8)–5.7 (–7.8, –3.5)–2.6 (–5.1, –0.1)0.07
     P value0.0030.030.02 
    • Abbreviation: VAS, Visual Analog Scale.

    • Note: Significance achieved at P < 0.05.

    • ↵a Regression analysis controlled for age, body mass index, Charlson Comorbidity Index, and preoperative diagnosis.

PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

International Journal of Spine Surgery
Vol. 16, Issue 6
1 Dec 2022
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author

Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on International Journal of Spine Surgery.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Perioperative Change in Cervical Lordosis and Health-Related Quality-of-Life Outcomes
(Your Name) has sent you a message from International Journal of Spine Surgery
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the International Journal of Spine Surgery web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Perioperative Change in Cervical Lordosis and Health-Related Quality-of-Life Outcomes
Jose A. Canseco, Brian A. Karamian, Parthik D. Patel, Michael Markowitz, Joseph K. Lee, Mark F. Kurd, D. Greg Anderson, Jeffrey A. Rihn, Alan S. Hilibrand, Christopher K. Kepler, Alexander R. Vaccaro, Gregory D. Schroeder
International Journal of Spine Surgery Dec 2022, 16 (6) 960-968; DOI: 10.14444/8325

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
Perioperative Change in Cervical Lordosis and Health-Related Quality-of-Life Outcomes
Jose A. Canseco, Brian A. Karamian, Parthik D. Patel, Michael Markowitz, Joseph K. Lee, Mark F. Kurd, D. Greg Anderson, Jeffrey A. Rihn, Alan S. Hilibrand, Christopher K. Kepler, Alexander R. Vaccaro, Gregory D. Schroeder
International Journal of Spine Surgery Dec 2022, 16 (6) 960-968; DOI: 10.14444/8325
Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Introduction
    • Methods
    • Results
    • Discussion
    • Conclusion
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • No related articles found.
  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • Reliability of biomechanical mensuration methods of the sagittal cervical spine on radiography used in clinical practice: A systematic review of literature
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • Innovation and Adversity in Spine Surgery: A Retrospective
  • Cervical Myelopathy Secondary to Bilateral Atlantoaxial Pseudoarticulations in Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Case Report
  • Incidence of Traumatic Spinal Injury Following Public Policy Update on Moped Usage in South Carolina
Show more Cervical Spine

Similar Articles

Keywords

  • cervical lordosis
  • kyphosis
  • patient-reported clinical outcomes (PROMs)
  • anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF)
  • alignment, HRQOL
  • construct length

Content

  • Current Issue
  • Latest Content
  • Archive

More Information

  • About IJSS
  • About ISASS
  • Privacy Policy

More

  • Subscribe
  • Alerts
  • Feedback

Other Services

  • Author Instructions
  • Join ISASS
  • Reprints & Permissions

© 2025 International Journal of Spine Surgery

International Journal of Spine Surgery Online ISSN: 2211-4599

Powered by HighWire