The safety and efficacy of anterior versus posterior decompression surgery in degenerative cervical myelopathy: a prospective randomized trial

View More View Less
  • Department of Neurosurgery, Faculty of Medicine, Cairo University, Cairo, Egypt
Restricted access

Purchase Now

USD  $45.00

Spine - 1 year subscription bundle (Individuals Only)

USD  $369.00

JNS + Pediatrics + Spine - 1 year subscription bundle (Individuals Only)

USD  $600.00
Print or Print + Online

OBJECTIVE

The safety and efficacy of anterior and posterior decompression surgery in degenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM) have not been validated in any prospective randomized trial.

METHODS

In this first prospective randomized trial, the patients who had symptoms or signs of DCM were randomly assigned to undergo either anterior cervical discectomy and fusion or posterior laminectomy with or without fusion. The primary outcome measures were the change in the visual analog scale (VAS) score, Neck Disability Index (NDI), and Nurick myelopathy grade 1 year after surgery. The secondary outcome measures were intraoperative and postoperative complications, hospital stay, and Odom’s criteria. The follow-up period was at least 1 year.

RESULTS

A total of 68 patients (mean age 53 ± 8.3 years, 72.3% men) underwent prospective randomization. There was a significantly better outcome in the NDI and VAS scores in the anterior group at 1 year (p < 0.05). Nurick myelopathy grading showed nonsignificant improvement using the posterior approach group (p = 0.79). The mean operative duration was significantly longer in the anterior group (p < 0.001). No significant difference in postoperative complications was found, except postoperative dysphagia was significantly higher in the anterior group (p < 0.05). There was no significant difference in postoperative patient satisfaction (Odom’s criteria) (p = 0.52). The mean hospital stay was significantly longer in the posterior group (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients with multilevel DCM, the anterior approach was significantly better regarding postoperative pain, NDI, and hospital stay, while the posterior approach was significantly better in terms of postoperative dysphagia and operative duration.

ABBREVIATIONS ACDF = anterior cervical discectomy and fusion; DCM = degenerative cervical myelopathy; NDI = Neck Disability Index; OPLL = ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament; VAS = visual analog scale.

Spine - 1 year subscription bundle (Individuals Only)

USD  $369.00

JNS + Pediatrics + Spine - 1 year subscription bundle (Individuals Only)

USD  $600.00

Contributor Notes

Correspondence Mohamed A. R. Soliman: Cairo University, Cairo, Egypt. moh.ar.sol@kasralainy.edu.eg.

INCLUDE WHEN CITING Published online May 1, 2020; DOI: 10.3171/2020.2.SPINE191272.

Disclosures The authors report no conflict of interest concerning the materials or methods used in this study or the findings specified in this paper.

  • 1

    Tracy JA, Bartleson JD. Cervical spondylotic myelopathy. Neurologist. 2010;16(3):176187.

  • 2

    Nouri A, Tetreault L, Singh A, Degenerative cervical myelopathy: epidemiology, genetics, and pathogenesis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2015;40(12):E675E693.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 3

    Karadimas SK, Erwin WM, Ely CG, Pathophysiology and natural history of cervical spondylotic myelopathy. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2013;38(22)(suppl 1):S21S36.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 4

    Lawrence BD, Jacobs WB, Norvell DC, Anterior versus posterior approach for treatment of cervical spondylotic myelopathy: a systematic review. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2013;38(22)(suppl 1):S173S182.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 5

    McCormick WE, Steinmetz MP, Benzel EC. Cervical spondylotic myelopathy: make the difficult diagnosis, then refer for surgery. Cleve Clin J Med. 2003;70(10):899904.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 6

    Epstein NE. Laminectomy for cervical myelopathy. Spinal Cord. 2003;41(6):317327.

  • 7

    Ghogawala Z, Martin B, Benzel EC, Comparative effectiveness of ventral vs dorsal surgery for cervical spondylotic myelopathy. Neurosurgery. 2011;68(3):622631.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 8

    Kadanka Z, Mareš M, Bednaník J, Approaches to spondylotic cervical myelopathy: conservative versus surgical results in a 3-year follow-up study. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2002;27(20):22052211.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 9

    Fehlings MG, Barry S, Kopjar B, Anterior versus posterior surgical approaches to treat cervical spondylotic myelopathy: outcomes of the prospective multicenter AOSpine North America CSM study in 264 patients. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2013;38(26):22472252.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 10

    Houten JK, Weinstein GR, Collins M. Long-term fate of C3-7 arthrodesis: 4-level ACDF versus cervical laminectomy and fusion [published online October 2, 2018]. J Neurosurg Sci. doi:10.23736/S0390-5616.18.04563-0

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 11

    Kim S, Alan N, Sansosti A, Complications after 3- and 4-level anterior cervical diskectomy and fusion. World Neurosurg. 2019;130:e1105e1110.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 12

    Koller H, Hempfing A, Ferraris L, 4- and 5-level anterior fusions of the cervical spine: review of literature and clinical results. Eur Spine J. 2007;16(12):20552071.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 13

    Kreitz TM, Hollern DA, Padegimas EM, Clinical outcomes after four-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion. Global Spine J. 2018;8(8):776783.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 14

    Wang S-J, Ma B, Huang Y-F, Four-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion for cervical spondylotic myelopathy. J Orthop Surg (Hong Kong). 2016;24(3):338343.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 15

    Kode S, Kallemeyn NA, Smucker JD, The effect of multi-level laminoplasty and laminectomy on the biomechanics of the cervical spine: a finite element study. Iowa Orthop J. 2014;34:150157.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 16

    Kumaresan S, Yoganandan N, Pintar FA, Finite element modeling of cervical laminectomy with graded facetectomy. J Spinal Disord. 1997;10(1):4046.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 17

    Subramaniam V, Chamberlain RH, Theodore N, Biomechanical effects of laminoplasty versus laminectomy: stenosis and stability. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2009;34(16):E573E578.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 18

    Kim BS, Dhillon RS. Cervical laminectomy with or without lateral mass instrumentation: a comparison of outcomes. Clin Spine Surg. 2019;32(6):226232.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 19

    Laiginhas ARA, Silva PA, Pereira P, Vaz R. Long-term clinical and radiological follow-up after laminectomy for cervical spondylotic myelopathy. Surg Neurol Int. 2015;6:162.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 20

    Li Z, Xue Y, He D, Extensive laminectomy for multilevel cervical stenosis with ligamentum flavum hypertrophy: more than 10 years follow-up. Eur Spine J. 2015;24(8):16051612.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 21

    Löfgren H, Osman A, Blomqvist A, Vavruch L. Sagittal alignment after laminectomy without fusion as treatment for cervical spondylotic myelopathy: follow-up of minimum 4 years postoperatively [published online June 26, 2019]. Global Spine J. doi:10.1177/2192568219858302

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 22

    Nurboja B, Kachramanoglou C, Choi D. Cervical laminectomy vs laminoplasty: is there a difference in outcome and postoperative pain? Neurosurgery. 2012;70(4):965970.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 23

    van Geest S, de Vormer AMJ, Arts MP, Long-term follow-up of clinical and radiological outcome after cervical laminectomy. Eur Spine J. 2015;24(suppl 2):229235.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 24

    Edwards CCI II, Heller JG, Murakami H. Corpectomy versus laminoplasty for multilevel cervical myelopathy: an independent matched-cohort analysis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2002;27(11):11681175.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 25

    Kristof RA, Kiefer T, Thudium M, Comparison of ventral corpectomy and plate-screw-instrumented fusion with dorsal laminectomy and rod-screw-instrumented fusion for treatment of at least two vertebral-level spondylotic cervical myelopathy. Eur Spine J. 2009;18(12):19511956.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 26

    Cahueque Lemus MA, Cobar Bustamante AE, Ortiz Muciño A, Caldera Hernandez G. Clinical outcome of anterior vs posterior approach for cervical spondylotic myelopathy. J Orthop. 2016;13(3):123126.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 27

    Audat ZA, Fawareh MD, Radydeh AM, Anterior versus posterior approach to treat cervical spondylotic myelopathy, clinical and radiological results with long period of follow-up. SAGE Open Med. 2018;6:2050312118766199.

    • Export Citation
  • 28

    Asher AL, Devin CJ, Kerezoudis P, Comparison of outcomes following anterior vs posterior fusion surgery for patients with degenerative cervical myelopathy: an analysis from Quality Outcomes Database. Neurosurgery. 2019;84(4):919926.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 29

    Cabraja M, Abbushi A, Koeppen D, Comparison between anterior and posterior decompression with instrumentation for cervical spondylotic myelopathy: sagittal alignment and clinical outcome. Neurosurg Focus. 2010;28(3):E15.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 30

    Liu T, Yang H-L, Xu Y-Z, ACDF with the PCB cage-plate system versus laminoplasty for multilevel cervical spondylotic myelopathy. J Spinal Disord Tech. 2011;24(4):213220.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 31

    Shibuya S, Komatsubara S, Oka S, Differences between subtotal corpectomy and laminoplasty for cervical spondylotic myelopathy. Spinal Cord. 2010;48(3):214220.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 32

    Yonenobu K, Hosono N, Iwasaki M, Laminoplasty versus subtotal corpectomy. A comparative study of results in multisegmental cervical spondylotic myelopathy. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1992;17(11):12811284.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 33

    Benzel EC, Lancon J, Kesterson L, Hadden T. Cervical laminectomy and dentate ligament section for cervical spondylotic myelopathy. J Spinal Disord. 1991;4(3):286295.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

Metrics

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 897 897 897
Full Text Views 76 76 76
PDF Downloads 56 56 56
EPUB Downloads 0 0 0