» Articles » PMID: 33139991

Clinical and Radiological Outcomes of Multilevel Cervical Laminoplasty Versus Three-level Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion in Patients with Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy

Overview
Specialty Radiology
Date 2020 Nov 3
PMID 33139991
Citations 13
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: Cervical spondylotic myelopathy (CSM) is one of the most common causes of spinal cord impairment in elderly patients. However, a consensus has yet to be reached on the ideal method of surgical intervention. In this study, we investigated serial changes of radiological findings after three-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) and multilevel laminoplasty and attempted to identify the radiological parameters affecting long-term clinical outcomes in CSM.

Methods: Of the 152 patients with multilevel CSM treated with three-level ACDF and multilevel laminoplasty, 42 had complete radiological parameters both before and 2 years after surgery (three-level ACDF, 22 patients; multilevel laminoplasty, 20 patients). Radiological parameters included spinal cord signal intensity (SI) changes on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Clinical outcomes including the Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) score, neck disability index (NDI), Oswestry disability index (ODI), and 36-Item Short Form Health Survey score were measured.

Results: The ACDF group showed significant restoration of segmental lordosis postoperatively (preoperatively: 2.21°, 6 months: 8.37°, P=0.026), and segmental and cervical range of motion (ROM) was markedly reduced and well maintained until the final follow-up (preoperatively: 25.48°, 24 months: 4.35°, P<0.001; preoperatively: 41.71°, 24 months: 20.18°, P<0.001). The recovery rates of the JOA score were 42.85% and 57.40% in the ACDF and laminoplasty groups, respectively, although this difference was not statistically significant. Multivariate regression analysis demonstrated that signal change on MRI significantly affected the recovery rate (P=0.003). The visual analog scale (VAS) score and NDI decreased considerably only in the laminoplasty group, and device complications were confirmed only in the ACDF group (incidence rate =36.5%).

Conclusions: Multilevel laminoplasty showed better radiological and similar clinical outcomes. ACDF had more surgical complications. Spinal cord SI change on preoperative MRI was the independent risk factor for poor clinical outcomes. We recommend laminoplasty instead of three-level ACDF to treat multilevel CSM.

Citing Articles

Direct anterior decompression in patients with ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament significantly relieves short-segment spinal cord high signal.

Wu Z, Zhang X, Song H, Xu A, Sun B, Xu C BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2024; 25(1):872.

PMID: 39482611 PMC: 11526592. DOI: 10.1186/s12891-024-07991-0.


Symptomatic Subsidence of a Box-Shaped Titanium Cage After Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion: Two Case Reports and Review of the Literature.

Tanaka S, Yoshida S, Tomio R, Ichimasu N, Kawaguchi A Cureus. 2024; 16(7):e63933.

PMID: 39105033 PMC: 11298663. DOI: 10.7759/cureus.63933.


Cervical Alignment and Range of Motion Change after Anterior 3-Level Hybrid Surgery Compared with Cervical Laminoplasty: A Matched Cohort Study.

Deng Y, He J, Chen H, Wang B, Gong Q, Li T Orthop Surg. 2024; 16(8):1893-1902.

PMID: 38859705 PMC: 11293915. DOI: 10.1111/os.14120.


Correlation of imaging characteristics of degenerative cervical myelopathy and the surgical approach with improvement for postoperative neck pain and neural function: a retrospective cohort study.

Ma Z, Ye Q, Ma X, Chen C, Feng H, Zhang Y Quant Imaging Med Surg. 2024; 14(6):3923-3938.

PMID: 38846315 PMC: 11151240. DOI: 10.21037/qims-23-1481.


Comparison of anterior cervical diskectomy with fusion (ACDF) and laminoplasty treating multilevel cervical spondylotic myelopathy with developmental canal stenosis: a retrospective study.

Dai L, Qin C, Guo P, Gong H, Wang W, Hou X J Orthop Surg Res. 2024; 19(1):29.

PMID: 38172985 PMC: 10763361. DOI: 10.1186/s13018-023-04510-0.


References
1.
Dru A, Lockney D, Vaziri S, Decker M, Polifka A, Fox W . Cervical Spine Deformity Correction Techniques. Neurospine. 2019; 16(3):470-482. PMC: 6790735. DOI: 10.14245/ns.1938288.144. View

2.
Matsuda Y, Miyazaki K, Tada K, Yasuda A, Nakayama T, Murakami H . Increased MR signal intensity due to cervical myelopathy. Analysis of 29 surgical cases. J Neurosurg. 1991; 74(6):887-92. DOI: 10.3171/jns.1991.74.6.0887. View

3.
Hirabayashi K, Miyakawa J, Satomi K, Maruyama T, Wakano K . Operative results and postoperative progression of ossification among patients with ossification of cervical posterior longitudinal ligament. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1981; 6(4):354-64. DOI: 10.1097/00007632-198107000-00005. View

4.
Han S, Kim H, Lee C, Kim H, Park D . Stand-Alone Cages for Anterior Cervical Fusion: Are There No Problems?. Korean J Spine. 2016; 13(1):13-9. PMC: 4844655. DOI: 10.14245/kjs.2016.13.1.13. View

5.
Quinn J, Kiely P, Lebl D, Hughes A . Anterior surgical treatment of cervical spondylotic myelopathy: review article. HSS J. 2015; 11(1):15-25. PMC: 4342400. DOI: 10.1007/s11420-014-9408-6. View