| Literature DB >> 28757711 |
Huan-Ming Tang1, Kuang-Ting Yeh1,2, Ru-Ping Lee2, Ing-Ho Chen1,3, Tzai-Chiu Yu1,3, Kuan-Lin Liu1, Cheng-Huan Peng1, Jen-Hung Wang4, Wen-Tien Wu1,2,3.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Expansive open-door laminoplasty (EOLP) is an effective procedure for multilevel cervical spondylotic myelopathy (MCSM). It preserves a higher range of cervical motion than laminectomy with fusion and reserves more posterior elements than laminectomy alone. MCSM with short-segment instability or correctable local kyphosis often requires long-segment decompression and adequate segment fusion.Entities:
Keywords: Expansive open-door laminoplasty; Lateral mass instrumented fusion; Multilevel cervical spondylotic myelopathy; Short segment instability
Year: 2015 PMID: 28757711 PMCID: PMC5509173 DOI: 10.1016/j.tcmj.2015.09.004
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Ci Ji Yi Xue Za Zhi
Demographic data of the case series.
| Male ( | Female ( | Total ( | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Age (y) | 67.4 ± 9.8 | 66.0 ± 7.8 | 66.7 ± 8.4 |
| Posterior instrumentation segment | |||
| 1 | 8 | 4 | 12 |
| 2 | 2 | 6 | 8 |
| Sagittal compression ratio | 0.54 ± 0.03 | 0.51 ± 0.02 | 0.53 ± 0.03 |
| Axial compression ratio | 0.33 ± 0.02 | 0.31 ± 0.01 | 0.32 ± 0.02 |
| Symptom persistence period (mo) | 11.6 ± 7.0 | 15.6 ± 5.4 | 13.6 ± 6.2 |
| Symptom aggravation period (mo) | 2.0 ± 0.7 | 2.6 ± 1.7 | 2.3 ± 1.3 |
| Pavlov ratio | 0.65 ± 0.05 | 0.64 ± 0.05 | 0.64 ± 0.05 |
| Cobb angle (°) | 10.5 ± 2.2 | 16.8 ± 4.8 | 13.6 ± 4.8 |
| ROM (°) | 36.8 ± 9.7 | 40.1 ± 7.3 | 38.4 ± 8.3 |
| Nurick score | 2.2 ± 0.5 | 3.0 ± 0.7 | 2.6 ± 0.7 |
| VAS score | 6.0 ± 0.0 | 5.2 ± 1.1 | 5.6 ± 0.8 |
| JOA score | 11.2 ± 1.8 | 10.4 ± 1.1 | 10.8 ± 1.5 |
Data are presented as n or mean ± standard deviation.
JOA = Japanese Orthopedic Association; mo = month; ROM = range of motion; VAS = visual analog scale; y = year
Fig. 1Final intraoperative photograph of expansive open-door laminoplasty and concomitant posterior instrumentation with titanium reconstruction plates.
Comparison of preoperative/postoperative functional outcomes.
| Preoperative | Postoperative 36 mo | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Nurick score | 2.6 ± 0.7 | 0.4 ± 0.7 | < 0.001* |
| VAS score | 5.6 ± 0.8 | 1.6 ± 1.3 | < 0.001* |
| JOA score | 10.8 ± 1.5 | 16.1 ± 0.6 | < 0.001* |
| JOA recovery rate (%) | 85.3 ± 14.7 | ||
| C5 nerve palsy (%) | 0 |
Data are presented as mean ± standard deviation.
*p < 0.05 was considered statistically significant after test.
JOA = Japanese Orthopedic Association; VAS = visual analog scale.
Comparison of preoperative/postoperative radiographic outcomes.
| Preoperative | Postoperative 36 mo | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Pavlov ratio | 0.64 ± 0.05 | 1.12 ± 0.04 | < 0.001* |
| Cobb angle | 13.6 ± 4.8 | 18.8 ± 6.7 | 0.066 |
| ROM | 38.4 ± 8.3 | 22.7 ± 4.5 | < 0.001* |
Data are presented as mean ± standard deviation.
*p < 0.05 was considered statistically significant after test.
JOA = Japanese Orthopedic Association; ROM = range of motion; VAS = visual analog scale.
Fig. 2(A,B) Preoperative dynamic radiographs show C5/6 instability. (C) Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) shows C3-7 stenosis compression of the spinal cord. (D,E) Postoperative anteroposterior and lateral X-rays at 36 months show better cervical curvature. (F) MRI 36 months postoperatively shows a patent spinal canal with smooth cerebrospinal fluid flow.