Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The “kickstand rod” technique for correction of coronal malalignment: two-year clinical and radiographic outcomes

  • Case Series
  • Published:
Spine Deformity Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

Restoring coronal alignment in spine deformity patients has been shown to play an important role in improving patient reported outcomes (PRO). Recently, the “kickstand rod” (KSR) technique was developed as a novel coronal correction method in complex spine deformity cases. The goal of the present study was to assess outcomes of this technique at two years of follow-up.

Methods

Consecutive, unique adult patients who underwent KSR constructs for coronal spinal malalignment between 2015 and 2019 with a minimum 2 year clinical and radiographic follow-up were identified. A KSR construct includes a more laterally placed iliac screw and additional rod that effectively depresses the ipsilateral ilium/pelvis for coronal correction, while serving as a buttress to prevent future loss of correction. Outcomes included revision for instrumentation-related complications, radiographic alignment, and PROs.

Results

Twenty patients were included with a mean age of 54 years [range: 20–73 years]. Mean follow-up time was 2.5 years [range: 2.0–5.0]. Mean number of levels fused was 17.3 [range: 10–24]. There were significant improvements in coronal alignment (CVA: 5.8 cm ± 2.6 cm vs. 1.7 cm ± 1.5 cm), sagittal alignment (SVA: 5.6 cm ± 5.9 cm vs. 1.6 cm ± 2.5 cm) and major Cobb angle (55º ± 32 vs. 26º ± 21) maintained at 2 years (p < 0.05). One patient experienced an asymptomatic fracture at the shank of the KSR iliac screw. There were significant improvements in Oswestry Disability Index and SRS-22 domains (p < 0.05).

Conclusion

The KSR technique is a safe and effective method for correcting coronal malalignment in complex spinal deformity patients with no revisions specific for the KSR or iliac screw and significantly improved PROs at a minimum two-year follow-up.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Glassman SD et al (2005) Correlation of radiographic parameters and clinical symptoms in adult scoliosis. Spine 30(6):682–688

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Mac-Thiong JM et al (2009) Can c7 plumbline and gravity line predict health related quality of life in adult scoliosis? Spine 34(15):E519–E527

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Daubs MD et al (2013) Does correction of preoperative coronal imbalance make a difference in outcomes of adult patients with deformity? Spine 38(6):476–483

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Koller H et al (2016) Factors influencing radiographic and clinical outcomes in adult scoliosis surgery: a study of 448 European patients. Eur Spine J 25(2):532–548

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Lewis SJ et al (2018) Risk factors for postoperative coronal balance in adult spinal deformity surgery. Global Spine J 8(7):690–697

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Acaroglu E et al (2015) Multiple regression analysis of factors affecting health-related quality of life in adult spinal deformity. Spine Deform 3(4):360–366

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Bao H et al (2016) Coronal imbalance in degenerative lumbar scoliosis: prevalence and influence on surgical decision-making for spinal osteotomy. Bone Joint J 98(9):1227–1233

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Buell TJ et al (2021) Global coronal decompensation and adult spinal deformity surgery: comparison of upper-thoracic versus lower-thoracic proximal fixation for long fusions. J Neurosurg Spine 35:1–13

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Obeid I et al (2019) Classification of coronal imbalance in adult scoliosis and spine deformity: a treatment-oriented guideline. Eur Spine J 28(1):94–113

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Cheng GHM et al (2021) Correction of degenerative lumbar coronal deformity using asymmetrical interbody cages: Surgical technique and case report. J Craniovertebr Junction Spine 12(4):432–436

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Heary RF, Karimi RJ (2010) Correction of lumbar coronal plane deformity using unilateral cage placement. Neurosurg Focus 28(3):E10

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Makhni MC et al (2019) The “kickstand rod” technique for correction of coronal imbalance in patients with adult spinal deformity: initial case series. J Neurosurg Spine 4:1–8

    Google Scholar 

  13. Buell TJ et al (2020) Kickstand rod technique for correcting coronal imbalance in adult scoliosis: 2-dimensional operative video. Oper Neurosurg (Hagerstown) 19(2):E163-e164

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Buell TJ et al (2020) Coronal correction using kickstand rods for adult thoracolumbar/lumbar scoliosis: case series with analysis of early outcomes and complications. Oper Neurosurg (Hagerstown) 19(4):403–413

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Fiani B, Jarrah RM (2020) The “kickstand rod” technique for coronal imbalance in patients with spinal deformity: a case report with review of literature. Cureus 12(12):e11876

    Google Scholar 

  16. Redaelli A et al (2020) Useful and innovative methods for the treatment of postoperative coronal malalignment in adult scoliosis: the “kickstand rod” and “tie rod” procedures. Eur Spine J 29(4):849–859

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Fairbank JC et al (1980) The Oswestry low back pain disability questionnaire. Physiotherapy 66(8):271–273

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Ware JE Jr, Sherbourne CD (1992) The MOS 36-item short-form health survey (SF-36). I. Conceptual framework and item selection. Med Care 30(6):473–483

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Gardner A et al (2021) The resting coronal and sagittal stance position of the torso in adolescents with and without spinal deformity. Sci Rep 11(1):2354

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Moal B et al (2014) Radiographic outcomes of adult spinal deformity correction: a critical analysis of variability and failures across deformity patterns. Spine Deform 2(3):219–225

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Ploumis A et al (2015) Coronal spinal balance in adult spine deformity patients with long spinal fusions: a minimum 2–5 year follow-up study. J Spinal Disord Tech 28(9):341–347

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Strom RG et al (2016) Lateral interbody fusion combined with open posterior surgery for adult spinal deformity. J Neurosurg Spine 25(6):697–705

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

No funding was received to assist with the preparation of this manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. The Daniel and Jane Och Spine Hospital, New York Presbyterian, Columbia University Medical Center, 5141 Broadway, NY, NY, 10034, USA

    Varun Puvanesarajah, Fthimnir M. Hassan, Joseph M. Lombardi, Zeeshan M. Sardar, Ronald A. Lehman & Lawrence G. Lenke

  2. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA

    Micheal Raad

Authors
  1. Varun Puvanesarajah
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Micheal Raad
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Fthimnir M. Hassan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Joseph M. Lombardi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Zeeshan M. Sardar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Ronald A. Lehman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Lawrence G. Lenke
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

VP: Contributed to the concept/design of the work, drafted the work, approved the version to be published, agrees to be accountable for all aspects of the work. MR: Contributed to the concept/design of the work, analysis/interpretation of the data, drafted the work, approved the version to be published, agrees to be accountable for all aspects of the work. FMH: Contributed to the concept/design of the work, acquisition, analysis, and interpretation of the data, drafted the work, approved the version to be published, agrees to be accountable for all aspects of the work. JML: Contributed to the concept/design of the work, revised the work critically for important intellectual content, approved the final version to be published, agrees to be accountable for all aspects of the work. ZMS: Contributed to the concept/design of the work, revised the work critically for important intellectual content, approved the final version to be published, agrees to be accountable for all aspects of the work. RAL: Contributed to the concept/design of the work, revised the work critically for important intellectual content, approved the final version to be published, agrees to be accountable for all aspects of the work. LGL: Contributed to the concept/design of the work, revised the work critically for important intellectual content, approved the final version to be published, agrees to be accountable for all aspects of the work.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Varun Puvanesarajah.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

Lawrence G. Lenke has received grant support from AO Spine, International Spine Summit Group, Scoliosis Research Society, EOS Technology and Setting Scoliosis Straight Foundation as a study investigator. Ronald A. Lehman has received grant support from the Department of Defense as a study investigator. Joseph M. Lombardi, Zeeshan M. Sardar, Ronald A. Lehman, and Lawrence G. Lenke have received consulting fees from Medtronic. Joseph M. Lombardi has received consulting fees from Stryker. Lawrence G. Lenke has received consulting fees from Acuity Surgical and Abryx. Lawrence G. Lenke has received reimbursements from Broadwater, AO Spine, and Scoliosis Research Society for attending meetings/travel. Ronald A. Lehman and Lawrence G. Lenke have received royalties and are patent holders from Medtronic. Ronald A. Lehman has received royalties and is a patent holder from Stryker. Varun Puvanesarajah, Fthimnir M. Hassan, and Micheal Raad declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

IRB-AAAR6015.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Puvanesarajah, V., Raad, M., Hassan, F.M. et al. The “kickstand rod” technique for correction of coronal malalignment: two-year clinical and radiographic outcomes. Spine Deform 11, 153–161 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s43390-022-00564-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s43390-022-00564-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation