| Literature DB >> 34516486 |
Yong Liu1, Xiao-Zhe Zhou2, Ning Li3, Tong-Guang Xu1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Laminectomy with lateral mass screw fixation (LCS) is considered an effective surgical procedure for cervical spondylotic myelopathy. However, varying degrees of loss of the cervical curvature were noted in some patients postoperatively. The aim of this study was to observe the relationship between cervical curvature and spinal drift distance after LCS and to determine its effect on neurological function, axial symptoms, and C5 palsy.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34516486 PMCID: PMC8428723 DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000026220
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Medicine (Baltimore) ISSN: 0025-7974 Impact factor: 1.817
Figure 1Radiograph of a 58-year-old male patient in group A who underwent laminectomy with lateral mass screw fixation at C3–7. The cervical spine angle was 3.1° (A) and the spinal drift distance was 1.3 mm (B).
Figure 2Radiograph of a 59-year-old female patient in group B who underwent laminectomy with lateral mass screw fixation at C3–7. The cervical spine angle was 11.8° (A) and the spinal drift distance was 2.2 mm (B).
Figure 3Radiograph of a 61-year-old male patient in group C who underwent laminectomy with lateral mass screw fixation at C3–6. The cervical spine angle was 17.6° (A) and the spinal drift distance was 3.2 mm (B, C).
Figure 4Schematic diagram of the mean laminectomy width.
Comparison of related characteristics between the 3 groups.
| Group A (28 cases) | Group B (36 cases) | Group C (26 cases) | F/ | ||
| Sex | |||||
| Male | 13 | 16 | 14 | 0.564 | .75 |
| Female | 15 | 20 | 12 | ||
| Age (y) | 56.1 ± 13.5 | 55.6 ± 12.2 | 57.2 ± 13.9 | 0.114 | .89 |
| Follow-up period (mo) | 15.8 ± 3.6 | 17.0 ± 3.8 | 16.3 ± 3.9 | 0.818 | .45 |
| Operated segment | |||||
| C3–7 | 16 | 19 | 14 | 0.787 | .50 |
| C3–6 | 4 | 6 | 4 | ||
| C3–5 | 2 | 3 | 2 | ||
| C4–7 | 6 | 8 | 6 | ||
Comparison of imaging data and C5 palsy among the 3 groups.
| C5 palsy [n,%] | |||||
| Group | Cervical spine angle (o) | Laminectomy width (mm) | Spinal drift distance (mm) | Yes | No |
| Group A (28 cases) | 2.7 ± 0.5 | 21.6 ± 1.5 | 1.2 ± 0.2 | 2 (7.1%) | 26 (92.9%) |
| Group B (36 cases) | 11.2 ± 2.6∗ | 20.9 ± 1.3∗ | 1.8 ± 0.4 | 3 (8.3%) | 33 (91.7%) |
| Group C (26 cases) | 20.8 ± 4.1∗,† | 21.4 ± 1.5∗,† | 3.0 ± 0.5 | 3 (11.5%) | 23 (88.5%) |
| F/ | 289.585‡ | 2.077‡ | 152.119‡ | 0.344§ | |
| <.001 | .131 | <.001 | .843 <.001 | ||
Comparison of neurological function and axial symptoms among the 3 groups.
| JOA score | Recovery rate (%) | VAS score of axial symptoms | ||||
| Preop | 3 mo postop | Final follow-up | 3 d postop | 1 mo postop | ||
| Group A (28 cases) | 7.5 ± 1.2 | 12.3 ± 2.6∗ | 13.6 ± 3.1∗ | 64.2 ± 12.5 | 5.1 ± 1.2 | 3.6 ± 0.6† |
| Group B (36 cases) | 7.7 ± 1.1 | 12.8 ± 2.9∗ | 13.8 ± 3.2∗ | 65.6 ± 13.3 | 3.7 ± 0.7 | 2.4 ± 0.3† |
| Group C (26 cases) | 7.4 ± 1.0 | 13.2 ± 3.0∗ | 13.9 ± 3.1∗ | 67.7 ± 14.1 | 3.3 ± 0.5 | 2.2 ± 0.2† |
| F value | 0.599‡ | 0.683‡ | 0.065‡ | 0.472‡ | 34.800‡ | 101.609‡ |
| .551 | .508 | .937 | .625 | <.001 | <.001 | |