Literature DB >> 1802159

Cervical laminectomy and dentate ligament section for cervical spondylotic myelopathy.

E C Benzel1, J Lancon, L Kesterson, T Hadden.   

Abstract

Seventy-five patients who underwent surgical treatment for cervical spondylotic myelopathy were evaluated with respect to the operative procedure performed and their outcome. Forty patients underwent a laminectomy plus dentate ligament section (DLS), 18 underwent laminectomy alone, and 17 underwent an anterior cervical decompression and fusion (ACDF). The patients were evaluated postoperatively for both stability and for neurologic outcome using a modification of the Japanese Orthopaedic Association Assessment Scale. Functional improvement occurred in all but one patient in the laminectomy plus DLS group. The average improvement was 3.1 +/- 1.5 points in this group; whereas the average improvement in the laminectomy and the ACDF groups was 2.7 +/- 2.0 and 3.0 +/- 2.0 points respectively. All of the patients who improved substantially (greater than or equal to 6 points) in the laminectomy plus DLS and the laminectomy alone groups had normal cervical spine contours (lordosis). The remainder had either a normal lordosis or no curve (no kyphosis or lordosis). All patients in the ACDF group had either a straight spine or a cervical kyphosis. These factors implicate spine curvature, in addition to choice of operation, as factors which are important in outcome determination. No problems with instability occurred in either the laminectomy or the laminectomy plus DLS group. Two patients incurred problems with stability in the ACDF group. Both required reoperation. In addition, four patients in this group who initially improved, subsequently deteriorated. Six patients in the laminectomy plus DLS group had a several day febrile episode related to an aseptic meningitis process. Laminectomy plus DLS is a safe and efficacious alternative to laminectomy for the treatment of cervical spondylotic myelopathy. The data presented here suggests that myelopathic patients with a cervical kyphosis are best treated with an ACDF and that patients with a normal cervical lordosis are best treated with a posterior approach. Although some selected patients may benefit from DLS, no criteria are available which differentiate this small subset of patients.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1991        PMID: 1802159     DOI: 10.1097/00002517-199109000-00005

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Spinal Disord        ISSN: 0895-0385


  108 in total

1.  Cervical spondylotic myelopathy: conservative versus surgical treatment after 10 years.

Authors:  Zdeněk Kadaňka; Josef Bednařík; Oldřich Novotný; Igor Urbánek; Ladislav Dušek
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2011-04-26       Impact factor: 3.134

2.  Neurological L5 burst fracture: posterior decompression and lordotic fixation as treatment of choice.

Authors:  Alessandro Ramieri; Maurizio Domenicucci; Paolo Cellocco; Antonino Raco; Giuseppe Costanzo
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2012-03-10       Impact factor: 3.134

3.  [HAC-titanium as an implant for interbody fusion in spinal canal stenosis of the cervical spine. Six-year clinical trial].

Authors:  D Daentzer; S Asamoto; D-K Böker
Journal:  Orthopade       Date:  2005-03       Impact factor: 1.087

4.  Diffusion tensor imaging predicts functional impairment in mild-to-moderate cervical spondylotic myelopathy.

Authors:  Benjamin M Ellingson; Noriko Salamon; John W Grinstead; Langston T Holly
Journal:  Spine J       Date:  2014-02-20       Impact factor: 4.166

5.  Anterior transoral atlantoaxial release and posterior instrumented fusion for irreducible congenital basilar invagination.

Authors:  Vinod Laheri; Kshitij Chaudhary; Ashok Rathod; Mihir Bapat
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2015-03-07       Impact factor: 3.134

6.  Abnormal central motor conduction at the upper but not lower limbs correlates with severe cervical spondylosis: discussion of an unexpected observation.

Authors:  Spyros N Deftereos
Journal:  Spinal Cord Ser Cases       Date:  2017-03-16

7.  Validity of the Japanese core outcome measures index (COMI)-neck for cervical spine surgery: a prospective cohort study.

Authors:  Yasushi Oshima; Kosei Nagata; Hideki Nakamoto; Ryuji Sakamoto; Yujiro Takeshita; Nozomu Ohtomo; Naohiro Kawamura; Masaaki Iizuka; Takashi Ono; Koji Nakajima; Akiro Higashikawa; Takahiko Yoshimoto; Tomoko Fujii; Sakae Tanaka; Hiroyuki Oka; Ko Matsudaira
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2020-11-19       Impact factor: 3.134

8.  Magnetic Resonance Imaging Biomarker of Axon Loss Reflects Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy Severity.

Authors:  Rory K J Murphy; Peng Sun; Junqian Xu; Yong Wang; Samir Sullivan; Paul Gamble; Joanne Wagner; Neill N Wright; Ian G Dorward; Daniel Riew; Paul Santiago; Michael P Kelly; Kathryn Trinkaus; Wilson Z Ray; Sheng-Kwei Song
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2016-05       Impact factor: 3.468

9.  An outcome measure for patients with cervical myelopathy: Japanese Orthopaedic Association Cervical Myelopathy Evaluation Questionnaire (JOACMEQ): Part 1.

Authors:  Mitsuru Fukui; Kazuhiro Chiba; Mamoru Kawakami; Shin-Ichi Kikuchi; Shin-Ichi Konno; Masabumi Miyamoto; Atsushi Seichi; Tadashi Shimamura; Osamu Shirado; Toshihiko Taguchi; Kazuhisa Takahashi; Katsushi Takeshita; Toshikazu Tani; Yoshiaki Toyama; Eiji Wada; Kazuo Yonenobu; Takashi Tanaka; Yoshio Hirota
Journal:  J Orthop Sci       Date:  2007-05-31       Impact factor: 1.601

10.  Japanese Orthopaedic Association Cervical Myelopathy Evaluation Questionnaire (JOACMEQ): part 4. Establishment of equations for severity scores. Subcommittee on low back pain and cervical myelopathy, evaluation of the clinical outcome committee of the Japanese Orthopaedic Association.

Authors:  Mitsuru Fukui; Kazuhiro Chiba; Mamoru Kawakami; Shinichi Kikuchi; Shinichi Konno; Masabumi Miyamoto; Atsushi Seichi; Tadashi Shimamura; Osamu Shirado; Toshihiko Taguchi; Kazuhisa Takahashi; Katsushi Takeshita; Toshikazu Tani; Yoshiaki Toyama; Kazuo Yonenobu; Eiji Wada; Takashi Tanaka; Yoshio Hirota
Journal:  J Orthop Sci       Date:  2008-02-16       Impact factor: 1.601

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.