Journal of Peking University(Health Sciences) >
All levels miniplate fixation and a modified hybrid fixation method in expansive open-door cervical laminoplasty: a retrospective comparative study
Received date: 2018-08-21
Online published: 2019-02-26
Objective: To retrospectively compare the effect of alternate levels miniplate and anchor fixation with the effect of all levels miniplate fixation in expansive open-door cervical laminoplasty (EOLP). Methods: Patients with cervical spondylosis underwent EOLP between July 2015 and June 2016 were included in the study. There were 33 patients in the alternate group (alternate levels miniplate and anchor fixation group) and 34 patients in the miniplate group (all levels miniplate fixation group). Neurological function was evaluated with the Japanese Orthopedic Association (JOA) score and degree of pain was assessed with the visual analogue scale (VAS) score. Basic clinical and surgical data, complication rates and medical costs of the two groups were compared. In addition, radiological examinations were performed pre- and post-operatively and at the final follow-up. Relative imaging data such as anteroposterior diameter (APD), cervical curvature index (CCI) and open angle were collected and compared. Results: (1) The mean follow-up time was 18.6 months in the alternate group and 18.9 months in the miniplate group. There were no significant differences in operation time, intraoperative blood loss, perioperative complication rates, post-operative hospital stays, VAS scores and neurological recovery rates preoperatively and at the final follow-up between the two groups. (2) Additionally, no obvious differences were observed about CCIs and APDs at the three follow-up time points between the two groups. Post-operative open angles at C4 and C6 in the alternate group were significantly smaller than those in the miniplate group. However, there were no significant differences in C3, C5 and C7 open angles between the two groups post-operatively. Notably, no significant differences were detected about the open angles at all levels between the two groups at the final follow-up. (3) When comparing radiologic data at different time points in each group, CCIs and open angles at each level had no significant differences, but APDs after surgery and at the final follow-up were significantly larger than pre-operative APDs. (4) Total costs in the alternate group were significantly lower than those in the miniplate group. Conclusion: The two surgical methods showed almost the same neurological recovery rates and complication rates. However, use of alternate levels miniplate and anchor fixation in EOLP can reduce medical expenses.
Key words: Cervical spondylosis; Laminoplasty; Treatment outcome
Ze-chuan YANG , Chao-xu LIU , Yang LIN , Wei-hua HU , Wen-jian CHEN , Feng LI , Heng ZENG . All levels miniplate fixation and a modified hybrid fixation method in expansive open-door cervical laminoplasty: a retrospective comparative study[J]. Journal of Peking University(Health Sciences), 2019 , 51(1) : 187 -193 . DOI: 10.19723/j.issn.1671-167X.2019.01.032
| [1] | Hirabayashi K, Watanabe K, Wakano K , et al. Expansive open-door laminoplasty for cervical spinal stenotic myelopathy[J]. Spine, 1983,8(7):693-699. |
| [2] | Kurokawa R, Kim P . Cervical laminoplasty: the history and the future[J]. Neurol Med Chirurgica, 2015,55(7):529-539. |
| [3] | Tamai K, Suzuki A, Terai H , et al. Laminar closure after expansive open-door laminoplasty: fixation methods and cervical alignments impact on the laminar closure and surgical outcomes[J]. Spine J, 2016,16(9):1062-1069. |
| [4] | Chen H, Deng Y, Li T , et al. Clinical and radiography results of mini-plate fixation compared to suture suspensory fixation in cervical laminoplasty: A five-year follow-up study[J]. Clin Neurol Neurosurg, 2015,138:188-195. |
| [5] | Hu W, Shen X, Sun T , et al. Laminar reclosure after single open-door laminoplasty using titanium miniplates versus suture anchors[J]. Orthopedics, 2014,37(1):e71-e78. |
| [6] | Lee DH, Park SA, Kim NH , et al. Laminar closure after classic Hirabayashi open-door laminoplasty[J]. Spine, 2011,36(25):E1634-E1640. |
| [7] | Jiang YQ, Li XL, Zhou XG , et al. A prospective randomized trial comparing anterior cervical discectomy and fusion versus plate-only open-door laminoplasty for the treatment of spinal stenosis in degenerative diseases[J]. Eur Spine J, 2017,26(4):1162-1172. |
| [8] | Liu FY, Ma L, Huo LS , et al. Mini-plate fixation versus suture suspensory fixation in cervical laminoplasty: A meta-analysis[J]. Medicine (Baltimore), 2017,96(5):e6026. |
| [9] | Hosono N, Yonenobu K, Ono K . Neck and shoulder pain after laminoplasty. A noticeable complication[J]. Spine, 1996,21(17):1969-1973. |
| [10] | Sun Y, Li L, Zhao J , et al. Comparison between anterior approaches and posterior approaches for the treatment of multilevel cervical spondylotic myelopathy: A meta-analysis[J]. Clin Neurol Neurosurg, 2015,134:28-36. |
| [11] | Harshavardhana NS, Dabke HV, Mehdian H . A new fixation technique for french-door cervical laminoplasty: surgical results with a minimum follow-up of 6 years[J]. Clin Spine Surg, 2017,30(4):E331-E337. |
| [12] | Kimura A, Seichi A, Inoue H , et al. Long-term results of double-door laminoplasty using hydroxyapatite spacers in patients with compressive cervical myelopathy[J]. Eur Spine J, 2011,20(9):1560-1566. |
| [13] | Kaito T, Hosono N, Makino T , et al. Postoperative displacement of hydroxyapatite spacers implanted during double-door laminoplasty[J]. J Neurosurg Spine, 2009,10(6):551-556. |
| [14] | Chen G, Luo Z, Nalajala B , et al. Expansive open-door lamino-plasty with titanium miniplate versus sutures[J]. Orthopedics, 2012,35(4):e543-e548. |
| [15] | Wang LN, Wang L, Song YM , et al. Clinical and radiographic outcome of unilateral open-door laminoplasty with alternative levels centerpiece mini-plate fixation for cervical compressive myelopathy: a five-year follow-up study[J]. Int Orthop, 2016,40(6):1267-1274. |
| [16] | Wang ZF, Chen GD, Xue F , et al. All levels versus alternate levels plate fixation in expansive open door cervical laminoplasty[J]. Indian J Orthop, 2014,48(6):582-586. |
| [17] | Yang HL, Chen GD, Zhang HT , et al. Open-door laminoplasty with plate fixation at alternating levels for treatment of multilevel degenerative cervical disease[J]. J Spinal Disord Tech, 2013,26(1):E13-E18. |
| [18] | Matsumoto M, Watanabe K, Tsuji T , et al. Risk factors for closure of lamina after open-door laminoplasty[J]. J Neurosurg Spine, 2008,9(6):530-537. |
| [19] | Rhee JM, Register B, Hamasaki T , et al. Plate-only open door laminoplasty maintains stable spinal canal expansion with high rates of hinge union and no plate failures[J]. Spine, 2011,36(1):9-14. |
| [20] | Wang M, Luo XJ, Deng QX , et al. Prevalence of axial symptoms after posterior cervical decompression: a meta-analysis[J]. Eur Spine J, 2016,25(7):2302-2310. |
| [21] | Chen H, Liu H, Deng Y , et al. Multivariate analysis of factors associated with axial symptoms in unilateral expansive open-door cervical laminoplasty with miniplate fixation[J]. Medicine (Baltimore), 2016,95(2):e2292. |
| [22] | Cheng Z, Chen W, Yan S , et al. Expansive open-door cervical laminoplasty: in situ reconstruction of extensor muscle insertion on the C2 spinous process combined with titanium miniplates internal fixation[J]. Medicine, 2015,94(28):e1171. |
| [23] | Qi Q, Chen Y, Ling Z , et al. Modified laminoplasty preserving the posterior deep extensor insertion into C2 improves clinical and radiologic results compared with conventional laminoplasty: a Meta-analysis[J]. World Neurosurg, 2018,111:157-165. |
| [24] | Wu FL, Sun Y, Pan SF , et al. Risk factors associated with upper extremity palsy after expansive open-door laminoplasty for cervical myelopathy[J]. Spine J, 2014,14(6):909-915. |
| [25] | Tsuji T, Matsumoto M, Nakamura M , et al. Factors associated with postoperative C5 palsy after expansive open-door laminoplasty: retrospective cohort study using multivariable analysis[J]. Eur Spine J, 2017,26(9):2410-2416. |
/
| 〈 |
|
〉 |