Literature DB >> 20644412

Cervical laminoplasty as a management option for patients with cervical spondylotic myelopathy: a series of 40 patients.

Anthony L Petraglia1, Vasisht Srinivasan, Michelle Coriddi, M Gordon Whitbeck, James T Maxwell, Howard J Silberstein.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Cervical spondylotic myelopathy (CSM) is one of the leading causes of spinal cord dysfunction in the adult population. Laminoplasty is an effective decompressive procedure for the treatment of CSM.
OBJECTIVE: We present our experience with 40 patients who underwent cervical laminoplasty using titanium miniplates for CSM.
METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of the medical records of a consecutive series of patients with CSM treated with laminoplasty at the University of Rochester Medical Center or Rochester General Hospital. We documented patient demographic data, presenting symptoms, and postoperative outcome. Data are also presented regarding the general cost of constructs for a hypothetical 3-level fusion.
RESULTS: Forty patients underwent cervical laminoplasty; all were available for follow-up. The mean number of levels was 4. All patients were myelopathic, and 17 (42.5%) had signs of radiculopathy preoperatively. Preoperatively, 62.5% of patients had a Nurick grade of 2 or worse. The average follow-up was 31.3 months. The median length of stay was 48 hours. On clinical evaluation, 36 of 40 patients demonstrated an improvement in their myelopathic symptoms; 4 were unchanged. Postoperative kyphosis did not develop in any patients.
CONCLUSION: The management of CSM for each of its etiologies remains controversial. As demonstrated in our series, laminoplasty is a cost-effective, decompressive procedure for the treatment of CSM, providing a less destabilizing alternative to laminectomy while preserving mobility. Cervical laminoplasty should be considered in the management of multilevel spondylosis because of its ease of exposure, ability to decompress, effective preservation of motion, maintenance of spinal stability, and overall cost.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20644412     DOI: 10.1227/01.NEU.0000371981.83022.B1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Neurosurgery        ISSN: 0148-396X            Impact factor:   4.654


  7 in total

1.  Outcomes of secondary laminoplasty for patients with unsatisfactory results after anterior multilevel cervical surgery.

Authors:  Hong-Wei Liu; Liang Chen; Nan-Wei Xu; Hui-Lin Yang; Yong Gu
Journal:  J Korean Neurosurg Soc       Date:  2015-01-31

2.  Surgical management of multilevel cervical spinal stenosis and spinal cord injury complicated by cervical spine fracture.

Authors:  Zhao-Wan Xu; Deng-Xing Lun
Journal:  J Orthop Surg Res       Date:  2014-08-22       Impact factor: 2.359

Review 3.  A Meta-Analysis of Cervical Laminoplasty Techniques: Are Mini-Plates Superior?

Authors:  Ali Humadi; Tat Chao; Sulaf Dawood; Mark Tacey; Arshad Barmare; Brian Freeman
Journal:  Global Spine J       Date:  2017-05-16

4.  Clinical Investigation of the Association of Opening Size with Sagittal Canal Diameter Based on Single-Door Cervical Laminoplasty.

Authors:  Chang-Bo Lu; Xiao-Jiang Yang; Jia-Chang Wu; Yun-Zhi Lin; Hong-Xun Sang
Journal:  Med Sci Monit       Date:  2019-10-01

5.  Laminectomy versus open-door laminoplasty for cervical spondylotic myelopathy: A clinical outcome analysis.

Authors:  Mauro Dobran; Fabrizio Mancini; Riccardo Paracino; Simona Lattanzi; Lucia di Somma; Davide Nasi; Gianluca Bizzocchi; Denis Aiudi; Maurizio Iacoangeli
Journal:  Surg Neurol Int       Date:  2020-04-18

6.  The discrepancy between preoperative cervical sagittal vertical axis and T1 slope predisposes inferior clinical outcomes in patients with cervical spondylotic myelopathy after cervical laminoplasty.

Authors:  Dong-Fan Wang; Wei-Guo Zhu; Wei Wang; Xiang-Yu Li; Chao Kong; Cheng-Xin Liu; Bin Shi; Shi-Bao Lu
Journal:  Front Surg       Date:  2022-08-26

7.  Lateral Position versus Prone Position for Cervical Laminoplasty: A Retrospective Comparative Study.

Authors:  Lin Du; Yanzheng Gao; Kun Gao; Guang Yang; Shanjun Gao
Journal:  Ther Clin Risk Manag       Date:  2020-02-21       Impact factor: 2.423

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.