Surgical Outcome if Laminectomy for Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy

Authors

  • Ari Sami College of Medicine, University of Sulaimani, Kurdistan Region, Iraq. Author

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.17656/jzs.10160

Keywords:

Cervical spodylosis, Cervical myelopathy, Laminectomy, Radiculopathy, Laminoplasty

Abstract

Spondylotic myelopathy is a common spinal cord disorder encountered frequently by neurosuregeons. It can produce a variety of clinical signs and symptoms secondary to neural compromise and biomechanical involvement of the spine. The surgical approach depends on patient's age, the presence of spinal instability, and the pathology of compression. The surgical treatment is still debatable, anterior and posterior approaches have been used with various reported success rates. Thirty consecutive patients with cervical spondylotic myelopathy (CSM) were studied retrospectively. They had extensive laminectomy for the affected levels. The early result of surgical treatment was evaluated. Patient's age ranged between 27 and 70 years (mean 47.8 years). Males constituted %83.3 of the patients. The higher incidence was in the 5th and 6th decades. Limb weakness was the main presenting symptom. The duration of the deterioration of the neurological condition ranged from 1 month t0 2.5 years, with a mean of 6 months. Twenty six patients (%86.7) ahd some degree of improvement post-operatively, Severe radiculopathy (11 patients), wound infection (2 patients), and CSF collection (1 patient) were the main complications. There was no mortality, Although decompressive laminectomy is an indirect procedure in patients with anteriorly located lesions, like osteophytes and herniated discs, it is an effective method to relieve or arrest the progression of myelopathy, Best outcome was associated with shorter duration of symptoms prior to surgery, younger age, and good general condition.

References

Greenberg MS. Handbook of Neurosurgery. 5th.ed.Thicme medical publishers.2001; 322-7.

McCormack BM; Weinstein PR. Cervical spondylosis. An update. West J Med, 1996; 165(1-2):43-51.

Hochman M; Tuli S. Cervical spondylotic myelopathy: A review. The Internet Journal of Neurology. 2005. 4(1). DOI: https://doi.org/10.5580/2414

Geck MJ; Eismont FJ. Surgical options for the treatment of cervical spondylotic myelopathy.

Nadcri S; Alberstone CD; Rupp FW; et.al. Cervical spondylotic myelopathy treated with corpectomy: technique and results in 44 patients. Neurosurgical Focus. 1996, 1(6). DOI: https://doi.org/10.3171/foc.1996.1.6.8

Faccioli F; Buffatti P; Grosslercher JC; et.al.Open-door decompressive cervical laminotomy. Technic and intial experiences. Neurochirurgie, 1987; 33 (1): 38-43.

Orr RD;Zdeblick TA. Cervical spondylotic myelopathy: Approaches to surgical treatment. Clinical orthopedics & related research. 1999 ;( 359):58-66. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/00003086-199902000-00007

Cho, Der-Yang; I.iau, Wen-Rei; Lee, Wen-Yen; et.al. Preliminary Experience using a polyethcretherketone cage in the treatment of cervical disc disease. Neurosurgery, 2002, 51 (6), 1343-1350 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/00006123-200212000-00003

Seichi A; Takeshita K; Ohishi I; et.al. long-term results of double-door laminoplasty for cervical stenotic myelopathy. Spine., 2001;26(5):479-487. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-200103010-00010

Heller Jg; Edwards CC: Murakami H; et.al. Laminoplasty versus laminectomy and fusion for multilevel cervical myclopathy: An independent matched cohort 2001:26(12):1330-6. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-200106150-00013

Chiba K; Toyama Y; Watanabe M;et.al. Impact of longitudinal distance of the cervical spine on the results of expansive open- doorlaminoplasty. Spine.2000, 25(22); 2893-8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-200011150-00010

McCormick WE; Steinmetz MP; Benzel EC; etal. Cervical spondylotic myclopathy. Cleveland clinic lournal of medicine. 2003: 70(10):899-93. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3949/ccjm.70.10.899

Epstein JA; Janin Y;Carras R; Lavine LS. A comparative study of the treatment of cervical spondylotic myeloradiculopathy. Acta Neurochir (Wien), 1982;61(1-3):89-104. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01740074

Morimoto T; Ohtsuka H; Sakaki T; Kawaguchi M. Postlaminectomy cervical spinal cord compression demonstrated by dynamic magnetic resonance imaging. Case report. J Neurosurg. 1998; 88( I ):155-7. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3171/jns.1998.88.1.0155

Kaminsky SB; Clark CR;Travnelis VC. Operative treatment of cervical spondylotic myelopathy and radiculopathy. A comparison of laminectomy and laminoplasty at five year average follow-up. Iowa Orrhop.J.2004; 24:95-105.

Hukuda S; Kojima Y. Sex discrepancy in the canallbody ratio of the cervical spine implicating the prevalence of cervical myelopathy in men. Spine. 2002; 27(3):250-3. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-200202010-00009

Kubo S; Goel "K; Yang Seok-jo;Tajima N. Biomechanical evaluation of cervical double-door laminoplasty using Hydroxyapatite spacer. Spine. 2003: 28(3):227¬234. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/01.BRS.0000042246.09816.20

Epstein JA. The surgical management of cervical spinal stenosis, spondylosis, and myeloradiculopathy by means of the posterior approach. Spine.1988; 13(7):864-9. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-198807000-00031

Naderi S; Benzel EC; Baldwin NG. Cervical spondylotic myclopathy: Surgical decision making. Neurosurgical Focus.1996, 14(1) pps. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3171/foc.1996.1.6.4

Flerkowitz HN. A comparison of anterior cervical fusion, cervical lam incctomy, and cervical laminoplasty for the surgical management of multiple level spondylotic radiculopathy. Spine. 1988; 13(7): 774-80. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-198807000-00011

Matsuda Y; Shibata T.Oki S; et.al. Outcomes of surgical treatment for cervical myelopathy in patients more than 75 years of age. Spine. 1999; 24(6). 529-534. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-199903150-00005

Hasegawa K; Homma T; Chiba y; etal. Effects of surgical treatment for cervical spondylotic myelopathy in patients [greater than over equal to] 70 years of age: A retrospective comparative study. Journal of Spinal disorders &Techniques. 2002, 15(6): 458-460. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/00024720-200212000-00004

Naderi S; Ozgen S; Pamir M;et.al. Cervical spondylotic myelopathy: surgical results and factors affecting prognosis. Neurosurgery. 1998, 43(1): 43-49. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/00006123-199807000-00028

Wiberg J. Effects of surgery on cervical spondylotic myelopathy. Acta .Veurochirurgica. 1986; 8I(3-4):113-117. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01401231

Huang RC; Girardi FP; Poynton AR; et.al. Treatment of multilevel cervical spondylotic myeloradiculopathy with posterior decompression and fusion with lateral mass plate fixation and local bone graft. Journal of spinal disorders &techniques. 2003:16(2):123-129. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/00024720-200304000-00002

Bhardwaj A; Long D M; Ducker T B; et.al. Neurologic deficits after cervical lam inectomy in the prone position. Journal of Neurosurgical anesthiology. 2001, 13(4); 314-319. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/00008506-200110000-00006

Hansen-Schwartz J; kruse-Larsen C; Nielsen CJ. Follow-up after laminectomy, with special reference to instability and deformity. British Journal of Neurosurgery. 2003. 7(4):301-305. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/02688690310001601171

Published

2007-06-27

How to Cite

Surgical Outcome if Laminectomy for Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy. (2007). Journal of Zankoy Sulaimani - Part A, 10(1), 25-34. https://doi.org/10.17656/jzs.10160

Most read articles by the same author(s)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 > >>