Backgroud:

The purpose of this study was to compare clinical outcomes and complications of primary and revision surgery in patients with adult spinal deformity (ASD) accompanied by sagittal imbalance. Revision surgery has been associated with poor clinical outcomes and increased risk of complications. Previous studies comparing primary versus revision surgery included data for a wide variety of diseases and ages, but few investigated patients with ASD with sagittal imbalance undergoing anterior and posterior combined surgery.

Methods:

Retrospective cohort analysis of prospectively collected data. We identified 60 consecutive patients with ASD combined with sagittal imbalance who underwent primary or revision surgery; of these, 6 patients were excluded for lack of a minimal 2-year follow-up. Patients’ surgical and radiological data, clinical outcomes, and complications were reviewed.

Results:

There were 30 patients in the primary group and 24 patients in the revision group. Patient characteristics, including the prevalence of sarcopenia, were similar between the two groups. Pedicle subtraction osteotomy was performed more frequently in the revision group although there was no statistically significant difference between groups. The primary group had more proximal junctional problems, whereas the revision group had more rod breakage (p < 0.05). There were significant improvements in clinical outcomes in both groups when the preoperative and 2-year postoperative values were compared. The Oswestry disability index and visual analog scale score were similar in both groups 2 years postoperatively.

Conclusions:

Considering the greater pain and disability at the time of the revision procedure, revision patients benefited more from surgery at the 2-year follow-up than the primary surgery patients. Complication rates were similar between the groups except for proximal junctional problems and rod breakage. Therefore, revision surgery should not be avoided in the treatment of ASD patients with sagittal imbalance.