Literature DB >> 18091491

The source of axial pain after cervical laminoplasty-C7 is more crucial than deep extensor muscles.

Noboru Hosono1, Hironobu Sakaura, Yoshihiro Mukai, Hideki Yoshikawa.   

Abstract

STUDY
DESIGN: Prospective study to investigate the incidence of axial pain in the 3 different procedures of laminoplasty.
OBJECTIVE: To inquire which is more important in the development of axial pain after laminoplasty: C7 or deep extensor muscles. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: The etiology of axial pain remains largely unknown. Some surgeons have attempted to preserve the paravertebral muscles with innovative procedures of laminoplasty and thereby reduce the incidence of axial pain. Meanwhile, we have reported that axial pain can be prevented by avoiding inclusion of C7 in laminoplasty.
METHODS: There were 91 patients with myelopathy who underwent our original laminoplasty, in which the deep extensor muscles were completely preserved exclusively on the hinged side. Until 2001, all candidates for laminoplasty underwent this procedure from C3-C7 (left-opened C3-C7 group, n = 37). From 2002, the same procedure was performed from C3-C6 (left-opened C3-C6 group, n = 31). From 2004, the opened side was changed from left to right (right-opened C3-C6 group, n = 23). Axial neck pain was graded as severe, moderate, or mild. Early pain during the first month after surgery and late pain during the first year after surgery were investigated. The laterality of early pain in the C3-C6 groups was recorded.
RESULTS: Significant early pain graded severe or moderate was observed in 49% in the left-opened C3-C7 group, but 15% in the left- or right-opened C3-C6 groups (P = 0.0008). Significant late pain was noted in 30% in the left-opened C3-C7 group and in 5.6% in the C3-C6 groups (P = 0.0036). Early axial pain, which usually was mild, was predominantly observed on the opened side in the C3-C6 groups.
CONCLUSION: To prevent axial pain, C7 should not be included in cervical laminoplasty, while detachment of the deep extensor muscles does not result in significant axial pain.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 18091491     DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e31815cda83

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)        ISSN: 0362-2436            Impact factor:   3.468


  27 in total

1.  Long-term results of double-door laminoplasty using hydroxyapatite spacers in patients with compressive cervical myelopathy.

Authors:  Atsushi Kimura; Atsushi Seichi; Hirokazu Inoue; Yuichi Hoshino
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2011-02-19       Impact factor: 3.134

2.  Impact of deep extensor muscle-preserving approach on clinical outcome of laminoplasty for cervical spondylotic myelopathy: comparative cohort study.

Authors:  Yoshihisa Kotani; Kuniyoshi Abumi; Manabu Ito; Hideki Sudo; Masahiko Takahata; Ken Nagahama; Akira Iwata; Akio Minami
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2012-03-23       Impact factor: 3.134

3.  Prevalence of axial symptoms after posterior cervical decompression: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Miao Wang; Xiao Ji Luo; Qian Xing Deng; Jia Hong Li; Nan Wang
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2016-03-19       Impact factor: 3.134

4.  Medium-term outcomes of C3-6 laminoplasty for cervical myelopathy: a prospective study with a minimum 5-year follow-up.

Authors:  Hironobu Sakaura; Noboru Hosono; Yoshihiro Mukai; Motoki Iwasaki; Hideki Yoshikawa
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2011-01-25       Impact factor: 3.134

5.  Postoperative neck symptoms of posterior approach for cervical compressive myelopathy: Expansive open-door laminoplasty vs. segmental partial laminectomy.

Authors:  Koji Otani; Masumi Iwabuchi; Katsuhiko Sato; Shinichi Konno; Shinichi Kikuchi
Journal:  Fukushima J Med Sci       Date:  2018-05-18

Review 6.  Axial pain after posterior cervical spine surgery: a systematic review.

Authors:  Shan-Jin Wang; Sheng-Dan Jiang; Lei-Sheng Jiang; Li-Yang Dai
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2010-10-13       Impact factor: 3.134

7.  Minimum 2-year outcome of cervical laminoplasty with deep extensor muscle-preserving approach: impact on cervical spine function and quality of life.

Authors:  Yoshihisa Kotani; Kuniyoshi Abumi; Manabu Ito; Hideki Sudo; Masahiko Takahata; Shigeki Ohshima; Yoshihiro Hojo; Akio Minami
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2009-02-12       Impact factor: 3.134

Review 8.  Current concepts of spondylosis and posterior spinal motion preservation for radiologists.

Authors:  Jack Porrino; Aditya Rao; Jay Moran; Annie Wang; Jonathan Grauer; Andrew Haims; Kimia Kani
Journal:  Skeletal Radiol       Date:  2021-06-15       Impact factor: 2.199

9.  Operative techniques for cervical radiculopathy and myelopathy.

Authors:  R G Kavanagh; J S Butler; J M O'Byrne; A R Poynton
Journal:  Adv Orthop       Date:  2011-08-14

Review 10.  Neck Pain Following Cervical Laminoplasty: Does Preservation of the C2 Muscle Attachments and/or C7 Matter?

Authors:  K Daniel Riew; Annie L Raich; Joseph R Dettori; John G Heller
Journal:  Evid Based Spine Care J       Date:  2013-04
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.