The time course of range of motion loss after cervical laminoplasty: A prospective study with minimum two-year follow-up

Spine

Volumn 34, Issue 11, 2009, Pages 1134-1139

  Hyun, Seung Jae ^a   Rhim, Seung Chul ^a   Roh, Sung Woo ^a   Kang, Suk Hyung ^a   Riew, K Daniel ^b  

^a University of Ulsan College of Medicine   (South Korea)

^b BARNES JEWISH HOSPITAL   (United States)

Author keywords

Cervical spine; Laminoplasty; Loss of range of motion; Ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament; Spondylosis; Time dependent

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CERVICAL MYELOPATHY; CERVICAL SPINE; CERVICAL SPONDYLOSIS; CLINICAL ARTICLE; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; HUMAN; LAMINOPLASTY; LIGAMENT CALCINOSIS; MALE; PAIN ASSESSMENT; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; RANGE OF MOTION; SPINE STABILIZATION;

ADULT; AGED; CERVICAL VERTEBRAE; FEMALE; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; HUMANS; LAMINECTOMY; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NECK PAIN; OSSIFICATION OF POSTERIOR LONGITUDINAL LIGAMENT; PAIN, POSTOPERATIVE; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; RANGE OF MOTION, ARTICULAR; SPONDYLOSIS; TIME FACTORS; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 67650284988     PISSN: 03622436     EISSN: 15281159     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e31819c389b     Document Type: Article

References (23)

1. Baisden J, Voo LM, Cusick JF, et al. Evaluation of cervical laminectomy and laminoplasty:alongitudinal studyinthe goat model. Spine 1999;13:1283-8, discussion 1288-9.
2. Matsunaga S, Sakou T, Nakanisi K. Analysis of the cervical spine alignment following laminoplasty and laminectomy. Spinal Cord 1999;37:20-4.
3. Puttlitz CM, Deviren V, Smith JA, et al. Biomechanics of cervical lamin-oplasty: kinetic studies comparing different surgical techniques, temporal effects and the degree of level involvement. Eur Spine J 2004;13:213-21.
4. Ratliff JK, Cooper PR. Cervical laminoplasty: a critical review. J Neurosurg 2003;98(suppl 3):230-8.
5. Satomi K, Nishu Y, Kohno T, et al. Long-term follow-up studies of open-door expansive laminoplasty for cervical stenotic myelopathy. Spine 1994; 19:507-10.
6. Kang SH, Rhim SC, Roh SW, et al. Postlaminoplasty cervical range of motion: early results. J Neurosurg Spine 2007;6:386 -90.
7. O'Brien MF, PetersonD, Casey AT, et al. A novel technique for laminoplasty augmentation of spinal canal area using titanium miniplate stabilization. A computerized morphometric analysis. Spine 1996;21:474-84.
8. Kim SJ, Song JK, Kim MH, et al. The prognostic implications of radiological findings after laminoplasty in cervical myelopathy patients. J Korean Neurosurg Soc 1997;26:961-70.
9. Jensen MP, Karoly P, O'Riordan EF, et al. The subjective experience of acute pain. An assessment of the utility of 10 indices. Clin J Pain 1989;5:153-9.
10. Bolesta MJ, Rechtine GR II, Chrin AM. Three-and four-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion with plate fixation: a prospective study. Spine 2000;25:2040-6.
11. Lowery GL, McDonough RF. The significance of hardware failure in anterior cervical plate fixation. Patients with 2 to 7 year follow-up. Spine 1998; 23:181-7.
12. Albert TJ, Vacarro A. Postlaminectomy kyphosis. Spine 1998;23:2738-45.
13. Nowinski GP, Visarius H, Nolte LP, et al. A biomechanical comparison of cervical laminaplasty and cervical laminectomy with progressive facetec-tomy. Spine 1993;18:1995-2004.
14. Aita I, Hayashi K, Wadano Y, et al. Posterior movement and enlargement of the spinal cord after cervical laminoplasty. J Bone Joint Surg 1998;80B:33-7.
15. Baba H, Uchida K, Maezawa Y, et al. Lordotic alignment and posterior migration of the spinal cord following en bloc open-door laminoplasty for cervical myelopathy: A magnetic resonance imaging study. J Neurol 1996; 243:626-32.
16. Seichi A, Takeshita K, Ohishi I, et al. Long-term results of double-door laminoplasty for cervical stenotic myelopathy. Spine 2001;26:479-87.
17. Wada E, Suzuki S, Kanazawa A, et al. Subtotal corpectomy versus lamin-oplasty for multilevel cervical spondylotic myelopathy. A long-term follow-up study over 10 years. Spine 2001;26:1443-7.
18. Kawaguchi Y, Kanamori M, Ishihara H, et al. Minimum 10-year follow-up after en bloc cervical laminoplasty. Clin Orthop 2003;294:129-39.
19. Hase H, Watanabe T, Hirasawa Y, et al. Bilateral open laminoplasty using ceramic laminas for cervical myelopathy. Spine 1991;16:1269-76.
20. Iizuka H, Nakagawa Y, Shimegi A, et al. Clinical results after cervical lamin-oplasty. Differences due to the duration of wearing a cervical collar. J Spinal Disord Tech 2005;18:489-91.
21. Wang MY, Green BA, Vitarbo E, et al. Adjacent segment disease: an uncommon complication after cervical expansile laminoplasty: case report. Neurosurgery 2003;53:770-2, discussion 772-3.
22. Fujimura Y, Nishi Y. Atrophy of the nuchal muscle and change in cervical curvature after expansive open-door laminoplasty. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 1996;115:203-5.
23. Sasai K, Saito T, Araki S, et al. Cervical curvature after laminoplasty for spondylotic myelopathy-involvement of yellow ligament, semispinalis cervi-cis muscle, and nuchal ligament. J Spinal Disord 2000;13:26-30.