Study Design Retrospective cohort study. Objectives To compare radiographic, clinical, and mechanical outcomes of posterior-only versus combined anterior–posterior fusion in adult spinal deformity (ASD) patients undergoing long-segment thoracolumbar fusion with pelvic fixation. Methods Consecutive ASD patients undergoing instrumented fusion ≥7 levels with pelvic fixation at a single center (2016–2023) were stratified by surgical approach. Longitudinal radiographic changes were analyzed using linear mixed-effects models with difference-in-differences (DiD) estimation. Mechanical complications were evaluated with Kaplan–Meier survival and Cox proportional hazards analysis. Results 207 patients were included (posterior-only, n=115; combined, n=92). Mean age was 62.1 ± 11.1 years (77.8% female), with mean follow-up of 46.2 ± 21.2 months. The combined approach demonstrated significantly greater DiD estimates for lumbar lordosis (−7.8° to −9.2°, all p<0.001), relative pelvic version mismatch (+3.4° to +4.2°, all p<0.001), and GAP score (−1.8 to −2.1, all p<0.001) at all postoperative timepoints. DiD estimates were stable across three covariate specifications. Rod fractures occurred in 14.8% of posterior-only versus 3.3% of combined patients (p=0.008), with superior rod fracture–free survival in the combined cohort (log-rank p=0.019). In the primary Cox model, the combined approach showed a non-significant trend toward lower rod fracture hazard (HR 0.35, 95% CI 0.10–1.24, p=0.10). Patient-reported outcomes improved comparably in both groups. Conclusions In long-segment ASD fusion with pelvic fixation, the combined anterior–posterior approach was associated with greater sustained sagittal correction and lower rod fracture rates, while both approaches provided comparable clinical improvement.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Demirci et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: