title: Assessment of sacral doming in lumbosacral spondylolisthesis.
abstract: METHODS
  Quantitative versus subjective evaluation of sacral doming in lumbosacral spondylolisthesis.
  
  
  OBJECTIVE
  To evaluate the relevance of the Spinal Deformity Study Group (SDSG) index in the assessment of sacral doming and to propose a quantitative criterion to differentiate between significant and nonsignificant doming.
  
  
  BACKGROUND
  There is no consensus on the optimal technique to assess sacral doming, although it is an important feature in spondylolisthesis.
  
  
  METHODS
  Five spinal surgeons subjectively assessed the sacral endplate of 100 subjects (34 high-grade spondylolisthesis, 50 low-grade spondylolisthesis, 16 controls) from lateral radiographs. Subjects were classified by each surgeon as having significant or nonsignificant sacral doming. An independent observer quantitatively evaluated sacral doming for all subjects using the SDSG index. A criterion to differentiate significant from nonsignificant sacral doming was sought, based on the comparison between the subjective assessment of surgeons and the quantitative evaluation by the independent observer. Intrarater and interrater reliability of the SDSG index was evaluated using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC).
  
  
  RESULTS
  Intrarater and interrater ICCs for the SDSG index were excellent at 0.91 and 0.88, respectively. Sacral doming evaluated with the SDSG index was 11.6% +/- 5.0% (range, 1.5%-18.9%), 16.4% +/- 6.3% (range, 3.7%-35.6%), and 27.9% +/- 10.9% (range, 5.7%-56.9%) for controls, low-grade, and high-grade cases, respectively. Overall intersurgeon agreement on the significance of sacral doming was substantial at 88% (kappa = 0.72). With a threshold value of 25% for the SDSG index, 93% of concordance was found between the quantitative evaluation using the SDSG index and the multisurgeons subjective assessment.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  This study confirms the relevance of the SDSG index to assess sacral doming in lumbosacral spondylolisthesis. The authors propose a criterion of 25% to differentiate significant from nonsignificant sacral doming using the SDSG index. Such a criterion will allow more accurate assessment of sacral remodeling, especially for borderline cases, and facilitate comparisons between studies.
authors.affiliation: Division of Orthopedic Surgery, CHU Sainte-Justine, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
authors.forename: Jean-Marc
authors.initials: JM
authors.lastname: Mac-Thiong
authors.forename: Hubert
authors.initials: H
authors.lastname: Labelle
authors.forename: Stefan
authors.initials: S
authors.lastname: Parent
authors.forename: Benoit
authors.initials: B
authors.lastname: Poitras
authors.forename: Alain
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Jodoin
authors.forename: Jean
authors.initials: J
authors.lastname: Ouellet
authors.forename: Luc
authors.initials: L
authors.lastname: Duong
mesh_terms: D006801:Humans; D008161:Lumbosacral Region; D015588:Observer Variation; D017410:Practice Guidelines as Topic; D011857:Radiographic Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted; D015203:Reproducibility of Results; D012447:Sacrum / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging*; D012720:Severity of Illness Index; D013168:Spondylolisthesis / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging*