ABSTRACT
Objective@#To compare the medium-term clinical and radiologic outcomes between anterior decompression with fusion (ADF) and posterior open-door laminoplasty (LAMP) in the treatment of multi-level cervical spondylotic myelopathy (MCSM).@*Methods@#Data of 121 patients meeting to inclusion criteria from October 2011 to February 2016 were retrospectively analyzed. All the patients were treated with ADF (ADF group, n=57) or LAMP (LAMP group, n=64) for MCSM. There were 39 males and 18 females in ADF group, aged from 35 to 77 years, with an average age of 58.8±10.1 years. And there were 64 cases in LAMP group, including 48 males and 16 females, aged from 28 to 82 years, with an average of 60.6±12.2 years. The operation time and blood loss were recorded. The clinical efficacy was evaluated by Japanese Orthopaedic Association Scores (JOA), improvement rate and visual analogue scale (VAS) before operation, 1, 3, 6, 12 and 24 months after operation and at the latest follow-up. At the same time, sagittal alignment of the C2-C7 lordotic angle and range of motion (ROM) in flexion and extension on plain X-rays was measured. Residual anterior compression to the spinal cord (ACS) in LAMP group on MRI was investigated. The incidence of complications such as axial symptoms and C5 nerve root paralysis were recorded.@*Results@#The average follow-up period was 25.6±3.8 months in ADF group and 27.3±4.1 months in LAMP group. Demographics were similar between the two groups. The mean JOA scores in ADF group increased from preoperative 8.25±2.33 to 14.62±3.15 at the latest follow-up, with an average recovery rate of 72.81%±11.32%. The mean JOA scores in LAMP group increased from preoperative 8.84±3.65 to 12.97±4.32 at the latest follow-up, with an average recovery rate of 66.54%±14.75%. The difference between two groups was statistically significant. Both of the VAS scores in the two groups decreased significantly at 1 month after the surgery, but the difference between the ADF group (1.92±0.75) and the LAMP group (2.78±0.68) was statistically significant (t=2.364, P=0.021). There was no significant difference in VAS score between the two groups at 3 months after operation. Cervical lordosis of ADF group increased from 15.3°±7.6° to 19.2°±5.7°, while that of LAMP group decreased from 16.8°±8.3° to 13.6°±4.3°. There was significant difference in cervical curvature between the two groups at the latest follow-up. Both two groups exhibited decreased cervical ROM, 15.2°±3.6° and 18.1°±4.1°, respectively, and the difference between two groups was statistically significant (t=3.392, P=0.000) . At the latest follow-up, the incidence of complication was 35.1% in ADF group and 20.3% in LAMP group, and the difference between two groups has no statistically significant. The LAMP group was divided into two subgroups: (1) ACS(+)(n=11) comprising patients who had ACS after surgery, and (2) ACS(-) (n=53) comprising patients without ACS. At the latest follow-up, the average JOA score of patients with anterior residual compression of spinal cord was 10.85±5.46, while the average JOA score of patients without anterior residual compression of spinal cord was 14.18±4.52. The recovery rate differed significantly between the ACS(+) and ACS(-) groups, 40.52%±9.76% and 70.38%±10.52%, respectively. Also at the latest follow-up, the cervical curvature, ROM and ROM loss angle were 10.2°±7.3°, 15.6°±6.7° and 11.8°±8.3° in the group with anterior residual compression of spinal cord, respectively. The groups without anterior residual compression of spinal cord were 15.8°±6.5°, 20.4°±10.2° and 8.8°±6.8°, respectively.@*Conclusion@#Both ADF and LAMP groups provided good outcomes at 2-year time-point whereas ADF could achieve more satisfactory outcomes and better sagittal alignment at the middle-term. ADF can remove the compression directly, maintain the curvature of cervical vertebra effectively and restore the nerve function well. The clinical outcomes after LAMP could be influenced by ACS, due to the reduction of cervical curvature and the decrease of cervical range of motion.
ABSTRACT
Objective To compare the medium?term clinical and radiologic outcomes between anterior decompression with fusion (ADF) and posterior open?door laminoplasty (LAMP) in the treatment of multi?level cervical spondylotic myelopathy (MCSM). Methods Data of 121 patients meeting to inclusion criteria from October 2011 to February 2016 were retrospectively analyzed. All the patients were treated with ADF (ADF group, n=57) or LAMP (LAMP group, n=64) for MCSM. There were 39 males and 18 females in ADF group, aged from 35 to 77 years, with an average age of 58.8±10.1 years. And there were 64 cases in LAMP group, including 48 males and 16 females, aged from 28 to 82 years, with an average of 60.6±12.2 years. The operation time and blood loss were recorded. The clinical efficacy was evaluated by Japanese Orthopaedic Association Scores (JOA), im?provement rate and visual analogue scale (VAS) before operation, 1, 3, 6, 12 and 24 months after operation and at the latest follow?up. At the same time, sagittal alignment of the C2-C7 lordotic angle and range of motion (ROM) in flexion and extension on plain X?rays was measured. Residual anterior compression to the spinal cord (ACS) in LAMP group on MRI was investigated. The inci? dence of complications such as axial symptoms and C5 nerve root paralysis were recorded. Results The average follow?up period was 25.6±3.8 months in ADF group and 27.3±4.1 months in LAMP group. Demographics were similar between the two groups. The mean JOA scores in ADF group increased from preoperative 8.25±2.33 to 14.62±3.15 at the latest follow?up, with an average re?covery rate of 72.81%±11.32%. The mean JOA scores in LAMP group increased from preoperative 8.84±3.65 to 12.97±4.32 at the latest follow?up, with an average recovery rate of 66.54%±14.75%. The difference between two groups was statistically significant. Both of the VAS scores in the two groups decreased significantly at 1 month after the surgery, but the difference between the ADF group (1.92±0.75) and the LAMP group (2.78±0.68) was statistically significant (t=2.364, P=0.021). There was no significant dif?ference in VAS score between the two groups at 3 months after operation. Cervical lordosis of ADF group increased from 15.3°± 7.6°to 19.2°±5.7°, while that of LAMP group decreased from 16.8°±8.3°to 13.6°±4.3°. There was significant difference in cervi?cal curvature between the two groups at the latest follow?up. Both two groups exhibited decreased cervical ROM, 15.2°±3.6°and 18.1°±4.1°, respectively, and the difference between two groups was statistically significant(t=3.392, P=0.000). At the latest fol?low?up, the incidence of complication was 35.1% in ADF group and 20.3% in LAMP group, and the difference between two groups has no statistically significant. The LAMP group was divided into two subgroups: (1) ACS(+)(n=11) comprising patients who had ACS after surgery, and (2) ACS(-) (n=53) comprising patients without ACS. At the latest follow?up, the average JOA score of pa?tients with anterior residual compression of spinal cord was 10.85±5.46, while the average JOA score of patients without anterior residual compression of spinal cord was 14.18 ± 4.52. The recovery rate differed significantly between the ACS(+) and ACS(-) groups, 40.52%±9.76% and 70.38%±10.52%, respectively. Also at the latest follow?up, the cervical curvature, ROM and ROM loss angle were 10.2°±7.3°, 15.6°±6.7°and 11.8°±8.3°in the group with anterior residual compression of spinal cord, respective?ly. The groups without anterior residual compression of spinal cord were 15.8°±6.5°, 20.4°±10.2°and 8.8°±6.8°, respectively. Conclusion Both ADF and LAMP groups provided good outcomes at 2?year time?point whereas ADF could achieve more satis?factory outcomes and better sagittal alignment at the middle?term. ADF can remove the compression directly, maintain the curva?ture of cervical vertebra effectively and restore the nerve function well. The clinical outcomes after LAMP could be influenced by ACS, due to the reduction of cervical curvature and the decrease of cervical range of motion.
ABSTRACT
ObjectiveTo discuss the selection of surgical approach,operative methods,and stability of reconstitution of affection of cervicothoracic junction.MethodsFrom January 2001 to February 2009,86cases with affection of cervicothoracic junction were treated surgically.The mean age of patients at the time of surgery was 43.1 years (range,17-70).Fifty-seven patients were treated with anterior approach (fixation with autologous bone grafts was done in 38 patients,Cage fixation in 5,titanium mesh in 14),21 with posterior approach(the fixation of lateral mass screw combined with pedicle screw was used in 12 patients,fixation with pedicle screw in 9),and 8 with anterior combined posterior approach.The neurological function of 53 cases of injury of cervicothoracic junction was assessed by American Spinal Injury Association (ASIA) criteria,and the rest was assessed by Japanese Orthopaedic Association(JOA) criteria; bone arthrodesis and restoring lordosis of cervical spine were assessed by Bohlman radiographic criteria.ResultsSixty-nine cases were followed up for an average of 12.4 months(range,3-45).ASIA score increased from 1.8 preoperatively to 2.3 postoperatively,and JOA score increased from 10.3 preoperatively to 12.8 postoperatively.Bone fusion reached in all patients,and lordosis of the cervical spine of 62 cases was restored.One case with respiratory dysfunction,1 case with cerebrospinal fluid leakage,2 cases with hoarseness,and 1 case with loose lateral mass screw were found after the surgery.ConclusionThe advantages of surgical reconstitution of the cervicothoracic junction included promoting recovery of neurological function,restoring the alignment and lordosis of the cervical spine,decreasing the rate of complication,which were dependent on the suitable surgical indications,surgical approach,and way of surgical reconstitution.The selection of reconstituted methods depends on disease,lesion site,type and degree of injury,experience of doctor,decompression and spinal stabilization synthetically.