Recovery process following cervical laminoplasty in patients with cervical compression myelopathy: Prospective cohort study

Spine

Volumn 34, Issue 26, 2009, Pages 2874-2879

  Suzuki, Akinobu ^a   Misawa, Hiromichi ^b   Simogata, Mitsuhiko ^b   Tsutsumimoto, Takahiro ^b   Takaoka, Kunio ^a   Nakamura, Hiroaki ^c  

^a OSAKA CITY UNIVERSITY GRADUATE SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (Japan)

^b Yodakubo Hospital   (Japan)

^c OSAKA CITY GENERAL HOSPITAL   (Japan)

Author keywords

Age; Cervical myelopathy; Duration of symptoms; Laminoplasty; Recovery process

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; CERVICAL MYELOPATHY; CERVICAL SPINAL CORD; CONTROLLED STUDY; CONVALESCENCE; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; FUNCTIONAL ASSESSMENT; HUMAN; LAMINOPLASTY; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SPINAL CORD COMPRESSION; SPINE SURGERY; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

AGE FACTORS; AGE OF ONSET; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; CERVICAL VERTEBRAE; COHORT STUDIES; DECOMPRESSION, SURGICAL; FEMALE; HAND STRENGTH; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; RECOVERY OF FUNCTION; SPINAL CORD COMPRESSION; STATISTICS, NONPARAMETRIC; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 74249095692     PISSN: 03622436     EISSN: 15281159     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181bb0e33     Document Type: Article

References (13)

1. Satomi K, Nishu Y, Kohno T, et al. Long-term follow-up studies of opendoor expansive laminoplasty for cervical stenotic myelopathy. Spine 1994; 19:507-510
2. Seichi A, Takeshita K, Ohishi I, et al. Long-term results of double-door laminoplasty for cervical stenotic myelopathy. Spine 2001;26:479-487
3. Iwasaki M, Kawaguchi Y, Kimura T, et al. Long-term results of expansive laminoplasty for ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament of the cervical spine: more than 10 years follow up. J Neurosurg 2002;96: 180-189
4. Sakaura H, Hosono N, Mukai Y, et al. Long-term outcome of laminoplasty for cervical myelopathy due to disc herniation: a comparative study of laminoplasty and anterior spinal fusion. Spine 2005;30:756-759
5. Chiba K, Ogawa Y, Ishii K, et al. Long-term results of expansive open-door laminoplasty for cervical myelopathy-average 14-year follow-up study. Spine 2006;31:2998-3005.
6. Noreau L, Vachon J. Comparison of three methods to assess muscular strength in individuals with spinal cord injury. Spinal Cord 1998;36: 716-723
7. Tachihara H, Kikuchi S, Konno S, et al. Epidemiologic investigation of the grip-and-release test (10-Second Test) in healthy volunteers. Comparison with patients with compression cervical myelopathy. Rinsho Seikei Geka 2006;41:1275-1279
8. Nagata K, Ohashi T, Abe J, et al. Cervical myelopathy in elderly patients: clinical results and MRI findings before and after decompression surgery. Spinal Cord 1996;34:220-226
9. Hasegawa K, Homma T, Chiba Y, et al. Effects of surgical treatment for cervical spondylotic myelopathy in patients ≥70 years of age: a retrospective comparative study. J Spinal Disord Tech 2002;15:458-460
10. Kohno K, Kumon Y, Oka Y, et al. Evaluation of prognostic factors following expansive laminoplasty for cervical spinal stenotic myelopathy. Surg Neurol 1997;48:237-245
11. Suzuki E, Nakamura H, Konishi S, et al. Analysis of the spastic gait caused by cervical compression myelopathy. J Spinal Disord Tech 2002;15:519-522
12. Yamazaki T, Yanaka K, Sato H, et al. Cervical spondylotic myelopathy: surgical results and factors affecting outcome with special reference to age differences. Neurosurgery 2003;52:122-6; discussion 6. (Pubitemid 36098660)
13. Shedid D, Benzel EC. Cervical spondylosis anatomy: pathophysiology and biomechanics. Neurosurgery 2007;60:S7-13.