Posterior or Single-stage Combined Anterior and Posterior Approach Decompression for Treating Complex Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy Coincident Multilevel Anterior and Posterior Compression.
METHODS
A single-center, retrospective, longitudinal matched cohort clinical study of prospectively collected outcomes.


OBJECTIVE
To compare retrospectively the clinical outcomes and complications of the posterior approach laminoplasty and single-stage anterior approach laminoplasty combined with anterior cervical corpectomy and fusion and anterior cervical discectomy and fusion for treating patients with cervical spondylotic myelopathy coincident multilevel anterior and posterior compression, known as complex cervical spondylotic myelopathy (cCSM) here.


BACKGROUND
The optimal surgical management of this type of cCSM remains controversial.


METHODS
Sixty-seven patients with multilevel cCSM underwent decompression surgery from 1996 to 2007. Among these patients, 31 underwent a single-stage combined approach with decompression (combined approach group) and 36 underwent laminoplasty for posterior approach (posterior approach group). Average operative duration, operative estimated blood loss, surgical costs, and cervical alignment were measured.


RESULTS
Average operative duration, operative estimated blood loss, and surgical costs were significantly lower in the posterior approach group than those in the combined approach group (P<0.001). Visual analog scale and modified Japanese Orthopedic Association scale were insignificantly different at each data collection period (P>0.05). No statistical difference was observed in the preoperative Cobb angle (P>0.05), whereas a significant statistical difference was observed for the postoperative Cobb angle (P<0.05) and variation of Cobb angle (P<0.05) between the 2 groups. The surgical incidences of complications were 22.2% and 48.4% in the posterior and combined approach groups (P<0.05), respectively.


CONCLUSIONS
For treating multilevel cCSM, both the posterior approach laminoplasty and single-stage combined approach led to significant neurological improvement and pain reduction in the majority of patients. Both approaches showed similar results in terms of decompression and neurological improvement. The posterior approach was superior to the combined approach in terms of surgical costs, surgical time, blood loss, and complication rate.
Department of Orthopedics, Zhoupu Hospital of Pudong District, Shanghai University of Medicine & Health Sciences, Shanghai, China.
Xiaoxiao
X
Zhou
Department of Orthopedics, Zhoupu Hospital of Pudong District, Shanghai University of Medicine & Health Sciences, Shanghai, China.
Pan
P
Cai
Spineosurgery Department, Luohe Central Hospital, The First Affiliated Hospital of Luohe Medical College, Luohe, Henan Province.
Yuwei
Y
Li
Spineosurgery Department, Luohe Central Hospital, The First Affiliated Hospital of Luohe Medical College, Luohe, Henan Province.
Haijiao
H
Wang
Department of Orthopedics, Zhoupu Hospital of Pudong District, Shanghai University of Medicine & Health Sciences, Shanghai, China.
Shengli
S
Xia
Department of Orthopedics, Zhoupu Hospital of Pudong District, Shanghai University of Medicine & Health Sciences, Shanghai, China.
Xiuhui
X
Wang
D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D000369:Aged, 80 and over; D016022:Case-Control Studies; D002574:Cervical Vertebrae / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging / Q000601:surgery; D015331:Cohort Studies; D019299:Decompression, Surgical / Q000379:methods*; D017352:Echo-Planar Imaging; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D065406:Laminoplasty / Q000379:methods*; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D017063:Outcome Assessment, Health Care; D011183:Postoperative Complications / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging / Q000209:etiology; D013117:Spinal Cord Compression / Q000150:complications / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging / Q000601:surgery*; D055009:Spondylosis / Q000150:complications / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging / Q000601:surgery*; D016896:Treatment Outcome; D055815:Young Adult
Eur Spine J. 2008 Jan;17 (1):20-9
17721713
J Spinal Disord. 1991 Sep;4(3):286-95
1802159
J Spinal Disord. 1999 Apr;12(2):172-3
10229535
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2012 Nov 1;37(23 ):E1450-8
22869063
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1988 Jul;13(7):774-80
3194786
Spine J. 2006 Nov-Dec;6(6 Suppl):252S-267S
17097545
J Spinal Disord Tech. 2008 May;21(3):165-74
18458585
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2006 Sep 1;31(19):E690-7
16946642
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2002 Jun 1;27(11):1168-75
12045513
Neurol India. 2012 Mar-Apr;60(2):201-9
22626705
Spine J. 2006 Nov-Dec;6(6 Suppl):242S-251S
17097544
J Spinal Disord Tech. 2006 Jul;19(5):353-7
16826008
Rev Chir Orthop Reparatrice Appar Mot. 1998 Feb;84(1):17-25
9775018
Eur Spine J. 2012 Mar;21(3):474-81
21826497
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1992 Nov;17(11):1281-4
1462201
Neurosurgery. 2007 Jan;60(1 Supp1 1):S82-9
17204891
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2013 Oct 15;38(22 Suppl 1):S195-209
23962998
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2006 Jun 15;31(14 ):1568-74; discussion 1575
16778689
Orthop Clin North Am. 1992 Jul;23 (3):505-11
1620542
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1995 Aug 1;20(15):1732-4
7482026