INTRODUCTION. Standing spinal alignment has been the center of focus recently, particularly in the setting of adult spinal deformity. Humans spend approximately half of their waking life in a seated position. While lumbopelvic sagittal alignment has been shown to adapt from standing to sitting posture, segmental vertebral alignment of the entire spine is not yet fully understood, nor are the effects of DEGEN or DEFORMITY. Segmental spinal alignment between sitting and standing, and the effects of degeneration and deformity were analyzed. METHODS. Segmental spinal alignment and lumbopelvic alignment (pelvic tilt (PT), pelvic incidence (PI), lumbar lordosis (LL), PI-LL, sacral slope) were analyzed. Lumbar spines were classified as NORMAL, DEGEN (at least one level of disc height loss >50%, facet arthropathy, or spondylolisthesis), or DEFORMITY (PI-LL mismatch>10°). Exclusion criteria included lumbar fusion/ankylosis, hip arthroplasty, and transitional lumbosacral anatomy. Independent samples t-tests analyzed lumbopelvic and segmental alignment between sitting and standing within groups. ANOVA assessed these differences between spine pathology groups. RESULTS. There were 183 NORMAL, 216 DEGEN and 92 DEFORMITY patients with significant differences in age, gender, and hip OA grades. After propensity matching for these factors, there were 56 patients in each group (age 63±14, 58% female) [Fig. 1]. Significant differences were noted between spinal pathology groups with regard to changes from standing to sitting alignment with regard to NORMAL vs DEGEN vs DEFORMITY groups in PT (13.93° vs −11.98° vs − 7.95°; p=0.024), LL (21.91° vs 17.45° vs 13.23°; p=0.002), PI-LL (−22.32° vs −17.28° vs −13.18°; p<0.001), SVA (−48.99° vs −29.98° vs −32.12°; p=0.002), and TPA(−16.35° vs −12.69° vs −9.64; p=0.001). TK (−2.08° vs −2.78° vs −2.00°, p=0.943) and CL (−3.84° vs −4.14° vs −3.57°, p=0.621) were not significantly different across spinal pathology groups [Fig. 2]. NORMAL patients had overall greater mobility in the lower lumbar spine from standing to sitting compared to DEGEN and DEFORMITY patients. L4-L5 (7.50° vs 5.23° vs 4.74°, p=0.012) and L5-S1 (6.96° vs 5.28° and 3.69°, p=0.027). There were no significant differences in change in alignment from standing to sitting at the upper lumbar levels or lower thoracic levels between the three groups [Fig. 3]. CONCLUSION. The lower lumbar spine provides the greatest sitting to standing change in lumbopelvic alignment in normal patients. Degeneration and deformity of the spine significantly reduces the mobility of the lower lumbar spine and PT. With lumbar spine degeneration and flatback deformity, relatively more alignment change occurs at the upper lumbar spine and thoracolumbar junction

In 2021, Vigdorchik et al. published a large multicentre study validating their simple Hip-Spine Classification for determining patient-specific acetabular component positioning in total hip arthroplasty (THA). The purpose of our study was to apply this Hip-Spine Classification to a sample of Australian patients undergoing THA surgery to determine the local acetabular component positioning requirements. Additionally, we propose a modified algorithm for adjusting cup anteversion requirements. 790 patients who underwent THA surgery between January 2021 and June 2022 were assessed for anterior pelvic plane tilt (APPt) and sacral slope (SS) in standing and relaxed seated positions and categorized according to their spinal stiffness and flatback deformity. Spinal stiffness was measured using pelvic mobility (PM); the ΔSS between standing and relaxed seated. Flatback deformity was defined by APPt <-13° in standing. As in Vigdorchik et al., PM of <10° was considered a stiff spine. For our algorithm, PM of <20° indicated the need for increased cup anteversion. Using this approach, patient-specific cup anteversion is increased by 1° for every degree the patient's PM is <20°. According to the Vigdorchik simple Hip-Spine classification groups, we found: 73% Group 1A, 19% Group 1B, 5% Group 2A, and 3% Group 2B. Therefore, under this classification, 27% of Australian THA patients would have an elevated risk of dislocation due to spinal deformity and/or stiffness. Under our modified definition, 52% patients would require increased cup anteversion to address spinal stiffness. The Hip-Spine Classification is a simple algorithm that has been shown to indicate to surgeons when adjustments to acetabular cup anteversion are required to account for spinal stiffness or flatback deformity. We investigated this algorithm in an Australian population of patients undergoing THA and propose a modified approach: increasing cup anteversion by 1° for every degree the patient's PM is <20°