Skip laminectomy and laminoplasty for cervical spondolytic myelopathy: A prospective study of clinical and radiologic outcomes

Journal of Spinal Disorders and Techniques

Volumn 23, Issue 2, 2010, Pages 96-100

  Sivaraman, Alagappan ^a   Bhadra, Arup K ^a   Altaf, Farhaan ^a   Singh, Anoushka ^b   Rai, Amarjit ^a   Casey, Adrian T ^a   Crawford, Robert J ^b  

^a ROYAL NATIONAL ORTHOPAEDIC HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

^b NORFOLK AND NORWICH UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Cervical myelopathy; Laminoplasty; Skip laminectomy

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; BLEEDING; CERVICAL SPONDOLYTIC MYELOPATHY; CERVICAL SPONDYLOSIS; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; HUMAN; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; LAMINECTOMY; LAMINOPLASTY; MALE; MENTAL HEALTH; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; OPERATION DURATION; PAIN; PAIN ASSESSMENT; POSTOPERATIVE PERIOD; PREOPERATIVE EVALUATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; RANGE OF MOTION; SCORING SYSTEM; SKIP LAMINECTOMY; SPINAL CORD COMPRESSION; SPINAL CORD DECOMPRESSION; SPINAL CORD DISEASE; SPINE MOBILITY; SURGICAL INFECTION; SURGICAL TECHNIQUE; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; ARTHROPLASTY; CERVICAL VERTEBRAE; DECOMPRESSION, SURGICAL; FEMALE; HUMANS; JOINT INSTABILITY; LAMINECTOMY; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NECK PAIN; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT (HEALTH CARE); POSTOPERATIVE COMPLICATIONS; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; RANGE OF MOTION, ARTICULAR; SPINAL CORD COMPRESSION; SPINAL FUSION; SPONDYLOSIS;

EID: 77951073504     PISSN: 15360652     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/BSD.0b013e318198c92a     Document Type: Article

References (10)

1. Guigui P, Benoist M, Deburge A. Spinal deformity and instability after multilevel cervical laminectomy for spondylotic myelopathy. Spine. 1998;23:440-447.
2. Albert TJ, Vacarro A. Postlaminectomy kyphosis. Spine. 1998; 23:273-1245
3. Kawai S, Sunago K, Doi K, et al. Cervical laminoplasty (Hattori's method): procedure and follow-up results. Spine. 1988;13: 1245-1250.
4. Hosono N, Yonenobu K, Ono K. Neck and shoulder pain after laminoplasty: a noticeable complication. Spine. 1996;21:1969-1973.
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;19:507-510.
6. Seichi A, Takeshita K, Ohishi I, et al. Long-term results of double laminoplasty for cervical stenotic myelopathy. Spine. 2001;26:479-487.
7. Shiraishi T, Fukuda K, Yato Y, et al. Results of skip laminectomy: minimum 2-year follow-up study compared with open-door laminoplasty. Spine. 2003;28:2667-2672.
8. O'Brien MF, Peterson D, Casey AT, et al. A novel technique for laminoplasty augmentation of spinal canal area using titanium miniplate stabilization. A computerized morphometric analysis. Spine. 1996;21:474-483; discussion 484.
9. Baisden J, Voo LM, Cusick JF, et al. Evaluation of cervical laminectomy and laminoplasty: a longitudinal study in the goat model. Spine. 1999;13:183-188.
10. Suda K, Abumi K, Ito M, et al. Local kyphosis reduces surgical outcomes of expansive open-door laminoplasty for cervical spondylotic myelopathy. Spine. 2003;28:1258-1262.