Posterior Surgery for Cervical Myelopathy: Indications, Techniques, and Outcomes

Orthopedic Clinics of North America

Volumn 43, Issue 1, 2012, Pages 29-40

  Lawrence, Brandon D ^a   Brodke, Darrel S ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF UTAH SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

Author keywords

Cervical; Fusion; Laminectomy; Laminoplasty; Myelopathy; Spondylotic

Indexed keywords

CERVICAL MYELOPATHY; CERVICAL NERVE PARALYSIS; CLINICAL EFFECTIVENESS; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; DIAGNOSTIC IMAGING; HEMATOMA; HISTOPATHOLOGY; HUMAN; INCIDENCE; KYPHOSIS; LAMINECTOMY; LAMINOPLASTY; NERVE PARALYSIS; NEUROLOGIC DISEASE; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PATHOGENESIS; PATIENT SAFETY; PHYSICAL EXAMINATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RADICULOPATHY; REVIEW; SPINAL CORD COMPRESSION; SPINAL CORD DECOMPRESSION; SPINE FUSION; SPINE SURGERY; SURGICAL APPROACH; SURGICAL TECHNIQUE; TREATMENT INDICATION; WOUND INFECTION;

ADULT; AGED; CERVICAL VERTEBRAE; COMBINED MODALITY THERAPY; DECOMPRESSION, SURGICAL; FEMALE; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; HUMANS; LAMINECTOMY; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PAIN MEASUREMENT; PATIENT POSITIONING; PATIENT SELECTION; RISK ASSESSMENT; SEVERITY OF ILLNESS INDEX; SPINAL CORD DISEASES; SPINAL FUSION; SPONDYLOSIS; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 82655184754     PISSN: 00305898     EISSN: 15581373     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ocl.2011.09.003     Document Type: Review

References (55)

1. Rao R. Neck pain, cervical radiculopathy, and cervical myelopathy: pathophysiology, natural history, and clinical evaluation. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2002, 84(10):1872-1881.
2. Sampath P., Bendebba M., Davis J.D., et al. Outcome of patients treated for cervical myelopathy. A prospective, multicenter study with independent clinical review. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2000, 25(6):670-676.
3. Kadanka Z., Mares M., Bednanik J., et al. Approaches to spondylotic cervical myelopathy: conservative versus surgical results in a 3-year follow-up study. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2002, 27(20):2205-2210. [discussion: 2210-1].
4. Matz P.G., Anderson P.A., Holly L.T., et al. The natural history of cervical spondylotic myelopathy. J Neurosurg Spine 2009, 11(2):104-111.
5. Holly L.T., Matz P.G., Anderson P.A., et al. Clinical prognostic indicators of surgical outcome in cervical spondylotic myelopathy. J Neurosurg Spine 2009, 11(2):112-118.
6. Imai T. Nihon Seikeigeka Gakkai Zasshi 1970, 44(6):429-438. [in Japanese].
7. White A.A., Panjabi M.M. Biomechanical considerations in the surgical management of cervical spondylotic myelopathy. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1988, 13(7):856-860.
8. Breig A., Turnbull I., Hassler O. Effects of mechanical stresses on the spinal cord in cervical spondylosis. A study on fresh cadaver material. J Neurosurg 1966, 25(1):45-56.
9. Barnes M.P., Saunders M. The effect of cervical mobility on the natural history of cervical spondylotic myelopathy. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 1984, 47(1):17-20.
10. Mair W.G., Druckman R. The pathology of spinal cord lesions and their relation to the clinical features in protrusion of cervical intervertebral discs; a report of four cases. Brain 1953, 76(1):70-91.
11. Ono K., Ebara S., Fuji T., et al. Myelopathy hand. New clinical signs of cervical cord damage. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1987, 69(2):215-219.
12. Teresi L.M., Lufkin R.B., Reicher M.A., et al. Asymptomatic degenerative disk disease and spondylosis of the cervical spine: MR imaging. Radiology 1987, 164(1):83-88.
13. Ohshio I., Hatayama A., Kaneda K., et al. Correlation between histopathologic features and magnetic resonance images of spinal cord lesions. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1993, 18(9):1140-1149.
14. Matsuda Y., Miyazaki K., Tada K., et al. Increased MR signal intensity due to cervical myelopathy. Analysis of 29 surgical cases. J Neurosurg 1991, 74(6):887-892.
15. Shimomura T., Sumi M., Nishida K., et al. Prognostic factors for deterioration of patients with cervical spondylotic myelopathy after nonsurgical treatment. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2007, 32(22):2474-2479.
16. Spiker WR, Jeong EK, Daubs MD, et al. High resolution diffusion tensor imaging in cervical spondylotic myelopathy. Cervical Spine Research Society, 38th Annual Meeting. Charlotte (NC), December 2, 2010.
17. Shafaie F.F., Wippold F.J., Gado M., et al. Comparison of computed tomography myelography and magnetic resonance imaging in the evaluation of cervical spondylotic myelopathy and radiculopathy. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1999, 24(17):1781-1785.
18. Iwasaki M., Okuda S., Miyauchi A., et al. Surgical strategy for cervical myelopathy due to ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament: part 2: advantages of anterior decompression and fusion over laminoplasty. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2007, 32(6):654-660.
19. Edwards C.C., Heller J.G., Murakami H. Corpectomy versus laminoplasty for multilevel cervical myelopathy: an independent matched-cohort analysis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2002, 27(11):1168-1175.
20. Yonenobu K., Hosono N., Iwasaki M., et al. Laminoplasty versus subtotal corpectomy. A comparative study of results in multisegmental cervical spondylotic myelopathy. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1992, 17(11):1281-1284.
21. Sodeyama T., Goto S., Mochizuki M., et al. Effect of decompression enlargement laminoplasty for posterior shifting of the spinal cord. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1999, 24(15):1527-1531. [discussion: 1531-2].
22. Arnold H., Feldmann U., Missler U. Chronic spondylogenic cervical myelopathy. A critical evaluation of surgical treatment after early and long-term follow-up. Neurosurg Rev 1993, 16(2):105-109.
23. Bishara S.N. The posterior operation in treatment of cervical spondylosis with myelopathy: a long-term follow-up study. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 1971, 34(4):393-398.
24. Carol M.P., Ducker T.B. Cervical spondylitic myelopathies: surgical treatment. J Spinal Disord 1988, 1(1):59-65.
25. Kato Y., Iwasaki M., Fuji T., et al. Long-term follow-up results of laminectomy for cervical myelopathy caused by ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament. J Neurosurg 1998, 89(2):217-223.
26. Matsunaga S., Sakou T., Nakanisi K. Analysis of the cervical spine alignment following laminoplasty and laminectomy. Spinal Cord 1999, 37(1):20-24.
27. Perez-Lopez C., Isla A., Alvarez F., et al. Neurocirugia (Astur) 2001, 12(4):316-323. [discussion: 323-4, in Spanish].
28. Hamanishi C., Tanaka S. Bilateral multilevel laminectomy with or without posterolateral fusion for cervical spondylotic myelopathy: relationship to type of onset and time until operation. J Neurosurg 1996, 85(3):447-451.
29. Herkowitz H.N. A comparison of anterior cervical fusion, cervical laminectomy, and cervical laminoplasty for the surgical management of multiple level spondylotic radiculopathy. Spine 1988, 13(7):774-780.
30. Halvorsen C.M., Lied B., Harr M.E., et al. Surgical mortality and complications leading to reoperation in 318 consecutive posterior decompressions for cervical spondylotic myelopathy. Acta Neurol Scand 2011, 123:358-365.
31. Wimmer C., Gluch H., Franzreb M., et al. Predisposing factors for infection in spine surgery: a survey of 850 spinal procedures. J Spinal Disord 1998, 11(2):124-128.
32. Yukawa Y., Kato F., Ito K., et al. Laminoplasty and skip laminectomy for cervical compressive myelopathy: range of motion, postoperative neck pain, and surgical outcomes in a randomized prospective study. Spine 2007, 32:1980-1985.
33. Callahan R.A., Johnson R.M., Margolis R.N., et al. Cervical facet fusion for control of instability following laminectomy. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1977, 59(8):991-1002.
34. Roy-Camille R., Saillant G. Nouv Presse Med 1972, 1(40):2707-2709. [in French].
35. Magerl F., Seeman P.S., Grob D. Stable dorsal fusion of cervical spine (C2-T1) using hook plates. The Cervical Spine 1 1987, Springer Verlag, New York.
36. Heller J.G., Carlson G.D., Abitbol J.J., et al. Anatomic comparison of the Roy-Camille and Magerl techniques for screw placement in the lower cervical spine. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1991, 16(Suppl 10):S552-S557.
37. Barrey C., Mertens P., Jund J., et al. Quantitative anatomic evaluation of cervical lateral mass fixation with a comparison of the Roy-Camille and the Magerl screw techniques. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2005, 30(6):E140-E147.
38. Rihn J.A., Lawrence J., Gates C., et al. Adjacent segment disease after cervical spine fusion. Instr Course Lect 2009, 58:747-756.
39. Miyazaki K., Tada K., Matsuda Y., et al. Posterior extensive simultaneous multisegment decompression with posterolateral fusion for cervical myelopathy with cervical instability and kyphotic and/or S-shaped deformities. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1989, 14(11):1160-1170.
40. Katonis P., Papadakis S.A., Galanakos S., et al. Lateral mass screw complications: analysis of 1662 screws. J Spinal Disord Tech 2011, 24(7):415-420.
41. Hilibrand A.S., Carlson G.D., Palumbo M.A., et al. Radiculopathy and myelopathy at segments adjacent to the site of a previous anterior cervical arthrodesis. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1999, 81(4):519-528.
42. Graham A.W., Swank M.L., Kinard R.E., et al. Posterior cervical arthrodesis and stabilization with a lateral mass plate. Clinical and computed tomographic evaluation of lateral mass screw placement and associated complications. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1996, 21(3):323-328. [discussion: 329].
43. Tomita K., Kawahara N., Toribatake Y., et al. Expansive midline T-saw laminoplasty (modified spinous process-splitting) for the management of cervical myelopathy. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1998, 23(1):32-37.
44. Lee T.T., Manzano G.R., Green B.A. Modified open-door cervical expansive laminoplasty for spondylotic myelopathy: operative technique, outcome, and predictors for gait improvement. J Neurosurg 1997, 86(1):64-68.
45. Satomi K., Nishu Y., Kohno T., et al. Long-term follow-up studies of open-door expansive laminoplasty for cervical stenotic myelopathy. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1994, 19(5):507-510.
46. Hirabayashi K., Watanabe K., Wakano K., et al. Expansive open-door laminoplasty for cervical spinal stenotic myelopathy. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1983, 8(7):693-699.
47. Hoshi K., Kurokawa T., Nakamura K., et al. Expansive cervical laminoplasties-observations on comparative changes in spinous process lengths following longitudinal laminal divisions using autogenous bone or hydroxyapatite spacers. Spinal Cord 1996, 34(12):725-728.
48. Heller J.G., Edwards C.C., Murakami H., et al. Laminoplasty versus laminectomy and fusion for multilevel cervical myelopathy: an independent matched cohort analysis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2001, 26(12):1330-1336.
49. Woods B.I., Hohl J., Lee J., et al. Laminoplasty versus laminectomy and fusion for multilevel cervical spondylotic myelopathy. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2011, 469(3):688-695.
50. Manzano G.R., Casella G., Wang M.Y., et al. A prospective, randomized trial comparing expansile cervical laminoplasty versus cervical laminectomy and fusion for multi-level cervical myelopathy. Neurosurgery 2011, [Epub ahead of print].
51. Ratliff J.K., Cooper P.R. Cervical laminoplasty: a critical review. J Neurosurg 2003, 98(Suppl 3):230-238.
52. Hosono N., Sakaura H., Mukai Y., et al. C3-6 laminoplasty takes over C3-7 laminoplasty with significantly lower incidence of axial neck pain. Eur Spine J 2006, 15(9):1375-1379.
53. Sakaura H., Hosono N., Mukai Y., et al. Preservation of muscles attached to the C2 and C7 spinous processes rather than subaxial deep extensors reduces adverse effects after cervical laminoplasty. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2010, 35(16):E782-E786.
54. Satomi K., Ogawa J., Ishii Y., et al. Short-term complications and long-term results of expansive open-door laminoplasty for cervical stenotic myelopathy. Spine J 2001, 1(1):26-30.
55. Hatta Y., Shiraishi T., Hase H., et al. Is posterior spinal cord shifting by extensive posterior decompression clinically significant for multisegmental cervical spondylotic myelopathy?. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2005, 30(21):2414-2419.