全部 标题 作者
关键词 摘要

OALib Journal期刊
ISSN: 2333-9721
费用:99美元

查看量下载量

相关文章

更多...
PLOS ONE  2014 

Laminoplasty and Laminectomy Hybrid Decompression for the Treatment of Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy with Hypertrophic Ligamentum Flavum: A Retrospective Study

DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0095482

Full-Text   Cite this paper   Add to My Lib

Abstract:

Objective To report the outcomes of a posterior hybrid decompression protocol for the treatment of cervical spondylotic myelopathy (CSM) associated with hypertrophic ligamentum flavum (HLF). Background Laminoplasty is widely used in patients with CSM; however, for CSM patients with HLF, traditional laminoplasty does not include resection of a pathological ligamentum flavum. Methods This study retrospectively reviewed 116 CSM patients with HLF who underwent hybrid decompression with a minimum of 12 months of follow-up. The procedure consisted of reconstruction of the C4 and C6 laminae using CENTERPIECE plates with spinous process autografts, and resection of the C3, C5, and C7 laminae. Surgical outcomes were assessed using Japanese Orthopedic Association (JOA) score, recovery rate, cervical lordotic angle, cervical range of motion, spinal canal sagittal diameter, bone healing rates on both the hinge and open sides, dural sac expansion at the level of maximum compression, drift-back distance of the spinal cord, and postoperative neck pain assessed by visual analog scale. Results No hardware failure or restenosis was noted. Postoperative JOA score improved significantly, with a mean recovery rate of 65.3±15.5%. Mean cervical lordotic angle had decreased 4.9 degrees by 1 year after surgery (P<0.05). Preservation of cervical range of motion was satisfactory postoperatively. Bone healing rates 6 months after surgery were 100% on the hinge side and 92.2% on the open side. Satisfactory decompression was demonstrated by a significantly increased sagittal canal diameter and cross-sectional area of the dural sac together with a significant drift-back distance of the spinal cord. The dural sac was also adequately expanded at the time of the final follow-up visit. Conclusion Hybrid laminectomy and autograft laminoplasty decompression using Centerpiece plates may facilitate bone healing and produce a comparatively satisfactory prognosis for CSM patients with HLF.

References

[1]  Tracy JA, Bartleson JD (2010) Cervical spondylotic myelopathy. Neurologist 16: 176–87. doi: 10.1097/nrl.0b013e3181da3a29
[2]  Toledano M, Bartleson JD (2013) Cervical spondylotic myelopathy. Neurol Clin 31: 287–305. doi: 10.1016/j.ncl.2012.09.003
[3]  Wang L, Song Y, Liu L, Liu H, Kong Q, et al. (2012) Clinical outcomes of two different types of open-door laminoplasties for cervical compressive myelopathy: a prospective study. Neurol India 60: 210–6. doi: 10.4103/0028-3886.96403
[4]  Konya D, Ozgen S, Gercek A, Pamir MN (2009) Outcomes for combined anterior and posterior surgical approaches for patients with multisegmental cervical spondylotic myelopathy. J Clin Neurosci 16: 404–9. doi: 10.1016/j.jocn.2008.07.070
[5]  Muthukumar N (2012) Surgical management of cervical spondylotic myelopathy. Neurol India 60: 201–9. doi: 10.4103/0028-3886.96402
[6]  Mummaneni PV, Kaiser MG, Matz PG, Anderson PA, Groff MW, et al. (2009) Cervical surgical techniques for the treatment of cervical spondylotic myelopathy. J Neurosurg Spine 11: 130–41. doi: 10.3171/2009.3.spine08728
[7]  Singhal U, Jain M, Jaiswal AK, Behari S (2009) Unilateral ossified ligamentum flavum in the high cervical spine causing myelopathy. Indian J Orthop 43: 305–8. doi: 10.4103/0019-5413.49385
[8]  Shiraishi T (2002) Skip laminectomy–a new treatment for cervical spondylotic myelopathy, preserving bilateral muscular attachments to the spinous processes: a preliminary report. Spine J 2: 108–15. doi: 10.1016/s1529-9430(01)00118-8
[9]  Lu JJ (2007) Cervical laminectomy: technique. Neurosurgery 60 (1 Supp1): S149–53. doi: 10.1227/01.neu.0000249219.72956.c7
[10]  O’Brien MF, Peterson D, Casey AT, Crockard HA (1996) A novel technique for laminoplasty augmentation of spinal canal area using titanium miniplate stabilization. A computerized morphometric analysis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 21: 474–83 discussion 484. doi: 10.1097/00007632-199602150-00012
[11]  Hirabayashi K, Watanabe K, Wakano K, Suzuki N, Satomi K, et al. (1983) Expansive open-door laminoplasty for cervical spinal stenotic myelopathy. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 8: 693–9. doi: 10.1097/00007632-198310000-00003
[12]  Rhee JM, Register B, Hamasaki T, Franklin B (2011) Plate-only open door laminoplasty maintains stable spinal canal expansion with high rates of hinge union and no plate failures. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 36: 9–14. doi: 10.1097/brs.0b013e3181fea49c
[13]  Iwakura M, Yamamoto K, Nagashima T, Tamaki N (1999) Surgical technique and long-term follow-up of laminoplasty using titanium miniplates. No Shinkei Geka 27: 525–31.
[14]  Jiang L, Chen W, Chen Q, Xu K, Wu Q, et al. (2012) Clinical application of a new plate fixation system in open-door laminoplasty. Orthopedics 35: e225–31. doi: 10.3928/01477447-20120123-07
[15]  Chen G, Luo Z, Nalajala B, Liu T, Yang H (2012) Expansive open-door laminoplasty with titanium miniplate versus sutures. Orthopedics 35: e543–8. doi: 10.3928/01477447-20120327-24
[16]  Hirabayashi K, Miyakawa J, Satomi K, Maruyama T, Wakano K (1981) Operative results and postoperative progression of ossification among patients with ossification of cervical posterior longitudinal ligament. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 6: 354–64. doi: 10.1097/00007632-198107000-00005
[17]  Machino M, Yukawa Y, Ito K, Nakashima H, Kato F (2011) Dynamic changes in dural sac and spinal cord cross-sectional area in patients with cervical spondylotic myelopathy: cervical spine. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 36: 399–403. doi: 10.1097/brs.0b013e3181d2510b
[18]  Sodeyama T, Goto S, Mochizuki M, Takahashi J, Moriya H (1999) Effect of decompression enlargement laminoplasty for posterior shifting of the spinal cord. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 24: 1527–31 discussion 1531–2. doi: 10.1097/00007632-199908010-00005
[19]  Fehlings MG, Skaf G (1998) A review of the pathophysiology of cervical spondylotic myelopathy with insights for potential novel mechanisms drawn from traumatic spinal cord injury. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 23: 2730–7. doi: 10.1097/00007632-199812150-00012
[20]  Naderi S, Ozgen S, Pamir MN, Ozek MM, Erzen C (1998) Cervical spondylotic myelopathy: surgical results and factors affecting prognosis. Neurosurgery 43: 43–9 discussion 49–50. doi: 10.1097/00006123-199807000-00028
[21]  Sathyendra V, Darowish M (2013) Basic science of bone healing. Hand Clin 29: 473–81. doi: 10.1016/j.hcl.2013.08.002
[22]  Rhee JM, Basra S (2008) Posterior surgery for cervical myelopathy: laminectomy, laminectomy with fusion, and laminoplasty. Asian Spine J 2: 114–26. doi: 10.4184/asj.2008.2.2.114
[23]  Gok B, McLoughlin GS, Sciubba DM, McGirt MJ, Chaichana KL, et al. (2009) Surgical management of cervical spondylotic myelopathy with laminectomy and instrumented fusion. Neurol Res 31: 1097–101. doi: 10.1179/174313209x383277
[24]  Roberts MP, Robinson F (1996) The current treatment of cervical disc rupture. Conn Med 60: 395–8.
[25]  Geck MJ, Eismont FJ (2002) Surgical options for the treatment of cervical spondylotic myelopathy. Orthop Clin North Am 33(2) 329–48.
[26]  Park AE, Heller JG (2004) Cervical laminoplasty: use of a novel titanium plate to maintain canal expansion–surgical technique. J Spinal Disord Tech 17: 265–71. doi: 10.1097/01.bsd.0000095401.27687.c0
[27]  Matsumoto M, Watanabe K, Tsuji T, Ishii K, Takaishi H, et al. (2008) Risk factors for closure of lamina after open-door laminoplasty. J Neurosurg Spine 9: 530–7. doi: 10.3171/spi.2008.4.08176
[28]  Satomi K, Ogawa J, Ishii Y, Hirabayashi K (2001) Short-term complications and long-term results of expansive open-door laminoplasty for cervical stenotic myelopathy. Spine J 1: 26–30. doi: 10.1016/s1529-9430(01)00008-0
[29]  Jiang JL, Li XL, Zhou XG, Lin H, Dong J (2012) Plate-only open-door laminoplasty with fusion for treatment of multilevel degenerative cervical disease. J Clin Neurosci 19: 804–9. doi: 10.1016/j.jocn.2011.09.021
[30]  Deutsch H, Mummaneni PV, Rodts GE, Haid RW (2004) Posterior cervical laminoplasty using a new plating system: technical note. J Spinal Disord Tech 17: 317–20. doi: 10.1097/01.bsd.0000091070.73042.23
[31]  Yang SC, Yu SW, Tu YK, Niu CC, Chen LH, et al. (2007) Open-door laminoplasty with suture anchor fixation for cervical myelopathy in ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament. J Spinal Disord Tech 20: 492–8. doi: 10.1097/bsd.0b013e318033e844
[32]  Yang SC, Niu CC, Chen WJ, Wu CH, Yu SW (2008) Open-door laminoplasty for multilevel cervical spondylotic myelopathy: good outcome in 12 patients using suture anchor fixation. Acta Orthop 79: 62–6. doi: 10.1080/17453670710014770
[33]  Tani S, Isoshima A, Nagashima Y, Tomohiko NR, Abe T (2002) Laminoplasty with preservation of posterior cervical elements: surgical technique. Neurosurgery 50: 97–101 discussion 101–2. doi: 10.1227/00006123-200201000-00017
[34]  Itoh T, Tsuji H (1985) Technical improvements and results of laminoplasty for compressive myelopathy in the cervical spine. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 10: 729–36. doi: 10.1097/00007632-198510000-00007
[35]  Sakaura H, Hosono N, Mukai Y, Ishii T, Yoshikawa H (2003) C5 palsy after decompression surgery for cervical myelopathy: review of the literature. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 28: 2447–51. doi: 10.1097/01.brs.0000090833.96168.3f
[36]  Satomi K, Nishu Y, Kohno T, Hirabayashi K (1994) Long-term follow-up studies of open-door expansive laminoplasty for cervical stenotic myelopathy. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 19: 507–10. doi: 10.1097/00007632-199403000-00003
[37]  Tsuji T, azuma T, suoka K, suoka H, tosuneya T, et al. (2007) Retrospective cohort study between selective and standard C3–7 laminoplasty. Minimum 2-year follow-up study. Eur Spine J 16: 2072–7. doi: 10.1007/s00586-007-0428-5
[38]  Kawaguchi Y, Kanamori M, Ishihara H, Ohmori K, Nakamura H, et al. (2003) Minimum 10-year follow up after en bloc cervical laminoplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res Jun: 129–39.
[39]  Ratliff JK, Cooper PR (2003) Cervical laminoplasty: a critical review. J Neurosurg 98 (3 Suppl): 230–8.
[40]  Sun Y, Zhang F, Wang S, Zhang L, Pan S, et al. (2010) Open door expansive laminoplasty and postoperative axial symptoms: a comparative study between two different procedures. Evid Based Spine Care J 1: 27–33. doi: 10.1055/s-0030-1267065
[41]  Wang SJ, Jiang SD, Jiang LS, Dai LY (2011) Axial pain after posterior cervical spine surgery: a systematic review. Eur Spine J 20: 185–94. doi: 10.1007/s00586-010-1600-x
[42]  Yoshida M, Tamaki T, Kawakami M, Nakatani N, Ando M, et al. (2002) Does reconstruction of posterior ligamentous complex with extensor musculature decrease axial symptoms after cervical laminoplasty. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 27: 1414–8. doi: 10.1097/00007632-200207010-00008
[43]  Yukawa Y, Kato F, Ito K, Horie Y, Hida T, et al. (2007) Laminoplasty and skip laminectomy for cervical compressive myelopathy: range of motion, postoperative neck pain, and surgical outcomes in a randomized prospective study. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 32: 1980–5. doi: 10.1097/brs.0b013e318133fbce
[44]  Matsunaga S, Sakou T, Nakanisi K (1999) Analysis of the cervical spine alignment following laminoplasty and laminectomy. Spinal Cord 37: 20–4. doi: 10.1038/sj.sc.3100749
[45]  Steinmetz MP, Resnick DK (2006) Cervical laminoplasty. Spine J 6 (6 Suppl): 274S–281S.

Full-Text

Contact Us

service@oalib.com

QQ:3279437679

WhatsApp +8615387084133