Use of walking data in assessing operative results for cervical spondylotic myelopathy: Long-term follow-up and comparison with controls

Spine

Volumn 34, Issue 12, 2009, Pages 1296-1300

  Singh, Anoushka ^a   Choi, David ^a   Crockard, Alan ^a  

^a NATIONAL HOSPITAL FOR NEUROLOGY AND NEUROSURGERY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Decompressive surgery; Laminectomy; Laminoplasty; Operation; Spondylosis; Walking time

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; CASE CONTROL STUDY; CERVICAL SPONDYLOSIS; CLINICAL ARTICLE; COMPARATIVE STUDY; CONTROLLED STUDY; CONVALESCENCE; DECOMPRESSION SURGERY; DISEASE SEVERITY; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; HUMAN; MALE; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; SPINAL CORD DISEASE; WALKING;

ADULT; AGE FACTORS; AGED; CASE-CONTROL STUDIES; DECOMPRESSION, SURGICAL; DISEASE PROGRESSION; EXERCISE TEST; EXERCISE TOLERANCE; FEMALE; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; GAIT DISORDERS, NEUROLOGIC; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NEUROSURGICAL PROCEDURES; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; SPINAL CORD COMPRESSION; SPONDYLOSIS; TIME; TIME FACTORS; TREATMENT OUTCOME; WALKING;

EID: 67651148132     PISSN: 03622436     EISSN: 15281159     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181a09796     Document Type: Article

References (13)

1. Odom GL, Finney W, Woodhall B. Cervical disc lesions. JAMA 1958;36: 879-884
2. Andrews ET, Gentchos EJ, Beller ML. Results of anterior cervical spine fusions done at the hospital of the University of Pennsylvania. A nine-year follow-up. Clin Orthop 1971;8115-8120
3. Lees F, Turner JW. Natural history and prognosis of cervical spondylosis. BMJ 1963;2:1607-1610
4. Rowland LP. Surgical treatment of cervical spondylotic myelopathy: time for a controlled trial. Neurology 1992;42:5-13.
5. Herdman J, Linzbach M, Krzan M, et al. The European Myelopathy score. In: Bauer BBMKM, ed. Advances in Neurosurgery. Berlin, Germany: Springer; 1994:266-268
6. Kadanka Z, Bednarik J, Vohanka S, et al. Conservative treatment versus surgery in spondylotic cervical myelopathy: a prospective randomized study. Eur Spine J 2000;9:538-544 (Pubitemid 32005659)
7. Sampath P, Bendebba M, Davis JD, et al. Outcome in patients with cervical radiculopathy. Prospective, multicenter study with independent clinical review. Spine 1999;24:591-597 (Pubitemid 29136055)
8. Singh A, Crockard HA. Quantitative assessment of cervical spondylotic myelopathy by a simple walking test. Lancet 1999;354:370-373 (Pubitemid 29355753)
9. Singh A, Crockard HA. Comparison of seven different scales used to quatify severity of cervical spondylotic myelopathy and post-operative improvement. J Outcome Meas 2001;5:798-818.
10. Nurick S. The pathogenesis of the spinal cord disorder associated with cervical spondylosis. Brain 1972;95:87-100.
11. Fujiwara K, Yonenobu K, Ebara S, et al. The prognosis of surgery for cervical compression myelopathy. An analysis of the factors involved. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1989;71:393-398 (Pubitemid 19130456)
12. Naderi S, Ozgen S, Pamir MN, et al. Cervical spondylotic myelopathy: surgical results and factors affecting prognosis. Neurosurgery 1998;43: 43-49 (Pubitemid 28287780)
13. Baba H, Maezawa Y, Uchida K, et al. Plasticity of the spinal cord contributes to neurological improvement after treatment by cervical decompression. A magnetic resonance imaging study. J Neurol 1997;244:455-460 (Pubitemid 27379654)