| Literature DB >> 31440670 |
Yuji Matsuoka1, Kenji Endo1, Hirosuke Nishimura1, Hidekazu Suzuki1, Yasunobu Sawaji1, Taichiro Takamatsu1, Takeshi Seki1, Kazuma Murata1, Takamitsu Konishi1, Kengo Yamamoto1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Preoperative cervico-thoracic kyphosis and cervical regional positive imbalance are the risk factors for postoperative cervical kyphosis after expansive laminoplasty (ELAP). However, the relationship between preoperative global sagittal spinal alignment and postoperative cervical kyphosis in patients with cervical ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament (OPLL) is unclear. The purpose of this study was to investigate the relationship between the onset of postoperative cervical kyphosis after ELAP and the preoperative global spinal sagittal alignment in patients with OPLL with normal sagittal spinal alignment.Entities:
Keywords: Sagittal spinal alignment; cervical kyphosis; cervical laminoplasty; ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament
Year: 2018 PMID: 31440670 PMCID: PMC6698525 DOI: 10.22603/ssrr.2017-0078
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Spine Surg Relat Res ISSN: 2432-261X
Patient Demographic and Morphometric Characteristics in Ossification of the Posterior Longitudinal Ligament (OPLL) and Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy (CSM).
| OPLL | CSM |
| |
|---|---|---|---|
| Age (years) | 65.1±10.0 | 66.3±10.3 | 0.33 |
| Sex (male/female) | 23/4 | 25/17 | <0.01 |
| C2–C7 SVA (mm) | 23.3±10.8 | 22.7±13.7 | 0.42 |
| C2–C7 angle (°) | 13.5±10.5 | 10.0±9.0 | 0.07 |
| T1 slope (°) | 26.6±7.4 | 30.3±7.4 | 0.98 |
| C7 SVA (mm) | 12.8±36.3 | 28.1±34.5 | 0.96 |
| TK (°) | 31.9±12.9 | 33.5±8.1 | 0.74 |
| LL (°) | 45.7±11.9 | 46.8±13.6 | 0.63 |
| PT (°) | 15.2±6.1 | 16.4±7.5 | 0.76 |
| PI (°) | 46.8±12.4 | 50.4±9.9 | 0.90 |
The proportion of men was higher in OPLL than that of CSM. Preoperative spinal parameters showed no significant difference between the OPLL and CSM groups.
Preoperative Parameters of the Kyphosis Group (KG) and the Lordosis Group (LG) in Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy (CSM).
| KG | LG |
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age (years) | 67.7±9.2 | 65.7±10.9 | 0.73 | 0.20 |
| C2–C7 SVA (mm) | 24.5±8.5 | 22.8±11.8 | 0.70 | 0.16 |
| C2–C7 angle (°) | 8.6±8.9 | 15.8±10.6 | 0.02 | 0.73 |
| T1 slope (°) | 25.2±5.3 | 27.2±1.2 | 0.16 | 0.42 |
| C7 SVA (mm) | -2.8±9.8 | 19.8±38.3 | 0.02 | 0.67 |
| TK (°) | 32.9±3.6 | 31.4±2.4 | 0.64 | 0.47 |
| LL (°) | 47.0±12.7 | 45.1±11.8 | 0.67 | 0.15 |
| PT (°) | 13.9±4.9 | 15.8±6.6 | 0.15 | 0.32 |
| PI (°) | 41.8±6.6 | 48.2±13.5 | 0.02 | 0.55 |
In patients with CSM in the KG, C2–C7 angle, C7 sagittal vertical axis (SVA), and PI were significantly smaller than those in the LG.
*d: effect size
Preoperative Parameters of the Kyphosis Group (KG) and the Lordosis Group (LG) in Ossification of the Posterior Longitudinal Ligament (OPLL).
| KG | LG |
|
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age (years) | 60.9±13.1 | 67.7±7.2 | <0.05 | 0.79 |
| C2–C7 SVA (mm) | 12.7±17.5 | 26.1±10.5 | <0.05 | 0.80 |
| C2–C7 angle (°) | 5.4±5.6 | 11.6±9.5 | 0.03 | 0.75 |
| T1 slope (°) | 26.8±7.4 | 31.5±7.2 | 0.09 | 0.63 |
| C7 SVA (mm) | 29.1±31.5 | 27.7±36.3 | 0.53 | 0.35 |
| TK (°) | 28.7±8.4 | 35.2±7.4 | 0.05 | 0.82 |
| LL (°) | 51.4±13.6 | 45.1±13.5 | 0.84 | 0.46 |
| PT (°) | 15.4±6.9 | 16.8±7.9 | 0.34 | 0.19 |
| PI (°) | 53.7±8.3 | 49.2±10.3 | 0.86 | 0.48 |
In patients with cervical OPLL in the KG, C2–C7 sagittal vertical axis (SVA), C2–C7 angle, and thoracic kyphosis (TK) were significantly smaller than those in the LG. There were no significant differences in lumbo-pelvic alignments between the two groups in OPLL.
*d: effect size
Partially adopted from Seki et al[13]) with permission.
Figure 1.Schematic presentation of postoperative cervical kyphosis.
There are two types of postoperative cervical kyphosis that the mechanism is different depending on the positive or negative C7 SVA.
(a) The global spinal sagittal alignment showing positive imbalance and high T1 slope.
(b) The global spinal sagittal alignment showing negative balance and low T1 slope.