Yunus AYDIN, İsmail YÜCE, Okan KAHYAOĞLU, Müzeyyen ATASEVEN, Halit ÇAVUŞOĞLU

The posterior surgical treatment and outcomes of cervicalspondylotic myelopathy: Why not C5 nerve root palsyoccur

Aim: Cervical spondylotic myelopathy is an age-related degenerative spinal pathology. Anterior or posterior approaches are preferredfor surgical treatment. C5 palsy is a common complication after the posterior approach. The aim of our study is to describe themodified laminectomy technique, evaluate short-time surgical outcomes and comment on the C5 nerve root palsy formation.Materials and Methods: 83 patients who had been treated by modified laminectomy for cervical spondylotic myelopathy between theyears 2012 and 2017 in our clinic were undertaken in our study. We evaluated the preoperative and postoperative neurologic statusof the patients with VAS and JOA scales, complications (C5 palsy) of surgical treatment. The posterior approach was not performedat patients with a >13 degree angle of cervical curvature. Results: 61 of 83 patients were male and 22 were female. The mean age at the time of surgery was 57.8±8.3. The average JOA scalescore was 9.4±0.9 preoperatively, 10.1±.0.9 early postoperatively and 15.1±1.0 during the late postoperative follow-up. The averageangle of the cervical curvature preoperatively-postoperatively was 17.1±2.6 and 15.8±2.4 respectively. There weren’t any symptomsfor C5 nerve root palsy which is a common postoperative complication.Conclusions: The cervical posterior laminectomy, which includes en-bloc laminectomy and preserving of the facet joint capsule,allows a sufficient and safe decompression of the neural structures for cervical spondylotic myelopathy.

PDF

___

1. Klineberg E. Cervical spondylotic myelopathy: A review of the evidence. Orthop Clin N Am 2010;41:193-202. 2. Bohlman HH, Emery SE. The pathophysiology of cervical spondylosis and myelopathy. Spine 2001;13:843-6.
3. König SA, Spetzger U. Surgical management of cervical spondylotic myelopathy indications for anterior, posterior or combined procedures for decompression and stabilization. Acta Neurochir 2014;156:253-8.
4. Suk KS, Kim KT, Lee JH, et al. Sagittal alignment of the cervical spine after the laminoplasty. Spine 2007;32:656-60.
5. Chen Y, Chen D, Wang X. et al. C5 palsy after laminectomy and posterior cervical fixation for ossifcation of posterior longitudinal ligament. J Spinal Disord Tech 2007;20:533-5.
6. Chiba K, Toyama Y, Matsumoto M. et al. Segmental motor paralysis after expansive open door laminectomy. Spine 2002;27:2108-15.
7. Epstein JA: Extradural tethering effects as one mechanism of radiculopathy complicating posterior decompression of the cervical spinal cord. Spine 1996;21:1839-40.
8. Komagata M, Nishiyama M, Endo K. et al. Prophylaxis of C5 palsy after cervical expansive laminectomy by bilateral partial foraminotomy. Spine J 2004;4:650-5.
9. Sakaura H, Hosono N, Mukai Y, Ishii T, Yoshikawa H: C5 palsy after decompression surgery for cervical myelopathy: Review of the literature. Spine 2003;28:2447-51.
10. Sasai K, Saito T, Akagi S. et al. Preventing C5 palsy after laminectomy. Spine 2003;28:1972-7.
11. Takemitsu M, Cheung KM, Wong YW. Et al. C5nerve root palsy after cervical laminoplasty and posterior fusionwith instrumentation. J Spinal Disord Tech 2008;21:267-72.
12. Tsuzuki N, Abe R, Saiki K. et al. Extradural tethering effect as one mechanism of radiculopathy complicating posterior decompression of the cervical spinal cord. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1996;21:203-10.
13. Uematsu Y, Tokuhashi Y, Matsuzaki H. Radiculopathy after laminectomy of the cervical spine. Spine 1998;23:2057-6.
14. Tsuzuki N, Abe R, Saiki K. et al. Paralysis of the arm after posterior decompression of the cervical spinal cord. II; Analyses of clinical fndings. Eur Spine J 1993;2:197-202.
15. Wilson JR, Patel AA, Brodt ED. et al. Genetics and heritability of cervical spondylotic myelopathy and ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament: Results of a systematic review. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2013;38:123-46.
16. Nurick S: The pathogenesis of the spinal cord disorder associated with cervical spondylosis. Brain 1972;95:87-100.
17. Hukuda S, Mochizuki T, Ogata M. et al. Operations for cervical spondylotic myelopathy: A comparison of the results of anterior and posterior procedures. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1985;67:609-15.
18. Benzel EC, Lancon J, Kesterson L. et al. Cervical laminectomy and dectate ligament section for cervical spondylotic myelopathy. J Spinal Disord 1991;4:286- 95.
19. Kaplan N, Kasim HBF, Ozger O, et al. Complications of 200 cervical anterior surgery cases and the management of these complications in light of the literature. Ann Med Res 2019;26:1890-5.
20. Suda K, Abumi K, Ito M. et al. Local kyphosis reduces surgical outcomes of expansive open-door laminoplasty for cervical spondylotic myelopathy. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2003;28:1258-62.
21. Xiaotao Z, Yuan X, Feilong P. et al. Extensive laminectomy for the treatment of ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament in the cervical spine. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 2012;132:203-9.
22. Liu FY, Yang SD, Huo LS et al. Laminoplasty versus laminectomy and fusion for multilevel cervical compressive myelopathy: A meta-analysis. Medicine (Baltimore). 2016;95:3588.
23. Zhang H, Sun TW, Lu SL, et al. Comparison of effectiveness with laminoplasty versus laminectomy and fusion for cervical spondylotic myelopathy. Chin J Reparative Reconstr Surg 2012;26:1192-7.
24. Miao J. Shen Y. Long-term influence of three cervical posterior operative methods for multilevel cervical spondylotic myelopathy: a retrospective study of cervical curvature and clinical outcomes, Hebei MedicalUniversity, Academic Dissertation 2011;1-32.
25. Zeng H. Comparison of effectiveness with laminoplasty versus laminectomy and fusion for cervical stenosis. Guide China Med 2014;12:240-1.
26. Wang H, Ding WY, Shen Y, et al. Analysis of axial symptoms after indirect decompression for ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament of the cervical spine. Chin J Surg 2012;50:601.
27. Cole T, Veeravagu A, Zhang M. et al. Intraoperative neuromonitoring in single-level spinal procedures: a retrospective propensity score-matched analysis in a national longitudinal database. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2014;39:1950-9.
28. Musluman AM, Ozdemir B, Altas K, et al. The value of intraoperative neurophysiological monitoring in neurosurgery operations The Medical Bulletin of Sisli Etfal 2017;51:1-7.
29. Hasegawa K, Homma T, Chiba Y. Upper extremity palsy following cervical decompression surgery results from a transient spinal cord lesion. Spine 2007;32: 197- 202.
30. Wada E, Suzuki S, Kanazawa A. et al. Subtotal corpectomy versus laminoplasty for multilevel cervical spondylotic myelopathy: A long- term- followup study over 10 years. Spine 2001;26:1443-7.
31. Kalisvaart MM, Nassr A, Eck JC. C5 palsy after cervical decompression procedures. Neurosurg Q 2009;19:276-82.
32. Yamashita T, Yokogusu K, Yokozawa H. C5 nerve palsy after cervical laminoplasty: An analysis of three cases. Seikei Geka 1996;47:1365-9.
33. Sakaura H, Hosono N, Mukai Y, et al. C5 palsy after decompression surgery for cervical myelopathy: review of the literature. Spine 2003;28:2447-51.
34. Hirabayashi K, Satomi K. Operative procedure and results of expansive open-door laminoplasty. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1988;13:870-6.
35. Shimizu T, Shimada H, Edakuni H. Post-laminoplasty palsy of upper extremities, with special reference to the spinal cord factors. Bessatsu Seikeigeka 1996;29:188-93.
36. Tokuhashi Y, Matsuzaki H, Wakabayashi K. Postoperative cervical radiculopathy after laminoplasty. Bessatsu Seikeigeka 1996;29:195-9.