Clinical Original Article
The efficacy of unilateral open-door laminoplasty with reserved bilateral semispinalis in treating multi-level cervical diseases
Cao Rui, Liang Weidong, An Zhongcheng, Wang Jian, Guo Hailong, Mardan· Mamat, Pulati· Mamat, Sheng Jun, Sheng Weibin
Published 2017-02-01
Cite as Chin J Orthop, 2017,37(3): 153-161. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.0253-2352.2017.03.004
Abstract
ObjectiveTo evaluate the efficacy of unilateral open-door laminoplasty with reserved bilateral semispinalis for the treatment of multi-level cervical diseases.
MethodsA retrospective study of prospectively collected data from hospital was conducted. From January 2013 to December 2015, thirty-three patients with multi-level cervical disease underwent C3-C6 unilateral open-door laminoplasty with reserved bilateral semispinalis. There were 19 males and 14 females with average age 57.22±10.75 years (range 35-75 years). Moreover, 32 patients with multi-level cervical disease underwent unilateral open-door laminoplasty with only reserved supraspinal ligamentum, and 35 underwent C3-C7 traditional open-door laminoplasty at the same time. The demographics, operation duration, blood loss volume, cervical curvature, range of motion, axial symptoms, visual analogue scale (VAS), Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) score, the neck disability index (NDI) and complications were recorded and analyzed at preoperation, postoperation and at final follow-up.
ResultsThe demographics, cervical curvature and range of motion at preoperation, operation duration and blood loss were not significantly difference among three groups (P>0.05). Cervical curvature and range of motion of traditional open-door laminoplasty were 34.38°±7.96° and 11.89°±7.70° at final follow-up (P<0.05). Cervical curvature and range of motion of unilateral open-door laminoplasty with reserved bilateral semispinalis were 38.41°±7.33° and 14.60°±8.56°, and unilateral open-door laminoplasty with only reserved supraspinal ligamentum were 37.63°±4.91°and 14.34°±8.02°. There were significant differences among these 3 groups (P<0.05). JOA and NDI score of three groups were significantly improved at final follow-up (P<0.05). VAS of reserved bilateral semispinalis and reserved supraspinal ligamentum of unilateral open-door laminoplasty were significantly improved at final follow-up (P<0.05). JOA and recovery rate of three groups had no significant difference at final follow-up (P>0.05), while VAS score, NDI score were significantly different (P<0.05). In particular, VAS and NDI of unilateral open-door laminoplasty with reserved bilateral semispinalis were better than other groups. Early pain was reported in each patients. Two patients (6%) with axial symptom was present in unilateral open-door laminoplasty with reserved bilateral semispinalis, 5 patients (16%) in unilateral open-door laminoplasty with only reserved supraspinal ligamentum and 12 patients (34%) in traditional open-door laminoplasty. There were significantly difference among these groups (P<0.05). One patient with C5 nerve root palsy was reported in unilateral open-door laminoplasty with reserved bilateral semispinalis and unilateral open-door laminoplasty with only reserved supraspinal ligamentum, and two patients in traditional open-door laminoplasty. No cerebrospinal fluid leakage, spinal cord injury, door-hinge fracture, infection, implant loosening or breakage and other complications were observed in each groups.
ConclusionUnilateral open-door laminoplasty with reserved bilateral semispinalis is an effective technique in treating multi-level cervical disease. The technique not only guaranteed to have good recovery of neurological functional and to maintain cervical curvature and range of motion, but also contributed to decrease the occurrence of postoperative axial symptom.
Key words:
Cervical spondylosis; Ossification of posterior longitudinal ligament; Spinal stenosis; Treatment outcome
Contributor Information
Cao Rui
Department of Spinal Surgery, the First Affiliated Hospital of Xinjiang Medical University, Urumqi 830054, China
Liang Weidong
Department of Spinal Surgery, the First Affiliated Hospital of Xinjiang Medical University, Urumqi 830054, China
An Zhongcheng
Department of Spinal Surgery, the Second Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang Chinese Medical University, Hangzhou 310005, China
Wang Jian
Department of Spinal Surgery, the First Affiliated Hospital of Xinjiang Medical University, Urumqi 830054, China
Guo Hailong
Department of Spinal Surgery, the First Affiliated Hospital of Xinjiang Medical University, Urumqi 830054, China
Mardan· Mamat
Department of Spinal Surgery, the First Affiliated Hospital of Xinjiang Medical University, Urumqi 830054, China
Pulati· Mamat
Department of Spinal Surgery, the First Affiliated Hospital of Xinjiang Medical University, Urumqi 830054, China
Sheng Jun
Department of Spinal Surgery, the First Affiliated Hospital of Xinjiang Medical University, Urumqi 830054, China
Sheng Weibin
Department of Spinal Surgery, the First Affiliated Hospital of Xinjiang Medical University, Urumqi 830054, China