Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Impact of cervical sagittal parameters and spinal cord morphology in cervical spondylotic myelopathy status post spinous process-splitting laminoplasty

  • Original Article
  • Published:
European Spine Journal Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

No standard strategy exists for managing cervical spondylotic myelopathy (CSM). The efficacy of spinous process-splitting laminoplasty, its impact on cervical alignment change and the incidence of postoperative neck pain remain unclear. We analyzed the parameters of cervical alignment and cord morphology in CSM.

Methods

The radiographic parameters investigated were pre- and postoperative C2–C7 lordosis (CL), C2–C7 sagittal vertical axis (CSVA), T1 slope (TS), TS minus CL (TS − CL) and cervical spinal cord morphology. Myelopathy severity was measured using two different functional scores. Statistical analysis was performed to determine significant differences between preoperative and follow-up radiological findings and change in functional scores.

Results

This retrospective study comprised 85 CSM patients from a single institute, with a minimum follow-up of 24 months. Overall, 63.5% (n = 54) of patients had improvement in their postoperative cervical lordotic alignment; 36.5% (n = 31) developed progressive aggravation of the cervical kyphotic alignment. Pearson correlation analysis showed that CSVA, TS and T1–CL were independent predictors of CL curve change. Based on the receiver operating characteristic curve, the cutoff value for CSVA was 2.89 cm with a postoperative visual analog scale (VAS) > 4. The cutoff value of the TS − CL was 20 degrees with a postoperative VAS > 4. CSVA, TS and TS − CL had a significant association with variation in CL. CSVA and TS − CL had a significant association with postoperative neck pain.

Conclusions

CSVA, T1 slope and T1–CL are good predictors of postoperative degenerative kyphotic change and neck pain. Careful consideration of their preoperative cutoff values can improve postoperative outcomes.

Level of evidence

IV.

Graphic abstract

These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Tang JA, Scheer JK, Smith JS, Deviren V, Bess S, Hart RA et al (2015) The impact of standing regional cervical sagittal alignment on outcomes in posterior cervical fusion surgery. Neurosurgery 76:S14–S21

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Iyer S, Nemani VM, Nguyen J, Elysee J, Burapachaisri A, Ames CP et al (2016) Impact of cervical sagittal alignment parameters on neck disability. Spine 41:371–377

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Gum JL, Glassman SD, Douglas LR, Carreon LY (2012) Correlation between cervical spine sagittal alignment and clinical outcome after anterior cervical discectomy and fusion. Am J Orthop 41:E81–E84

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Suk KS, Kim KT, Lee JH, Lee SH, Lim YJ, Kim JS (2007) Sagittal alignment of the cervical spine after the laminoplasty. Spine 32:E656–E660

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Kim SW, Hai DM, Sundaram S, Kim YC, Park MS, Paik SH et al (2013) Is cervical lordosis relevant in laminoplasty? Spine J 13:914–921

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Scheer JK, Tang JA, Smith JS, Acosta FL, Protopsaltis TS, Blondel B et al (2013) Cervical spine alignment, sagittal deformity, and clinical implications: a review. J Neurosurg Spine 19:141–159

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Ratliff JK, Cooper PR (2003) Cervical laminoplasty: a critical review. J Neurosurg 98:S230–S238

    Google Scholar 

  8. Sodeyama T, Goto S, Mochizuki M, Takahashi J, Moriya H (1999) Effect of decompression enlargement laminoplasty for posterior shifting of the spinal cord. Spine 24:1527–1531 (discussion 31–32)

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Aita I, Hayashi K, Wadano Y, Yabuki T (1998) Posterior movement and enlargement of the spinal cord after cervical laminoplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Br 80:33–37

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Mihara H, Kondo S, Takeguchi H, Kohno M, Hachiya M (2007) Spinal cord morphology and dynamics during cervical laminoplasty: evaluation with intraoperative sonography. Spine 32:2306–2309

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Kawakami M, Tamaki T, Ando M, Yamada H, Yoshida M (2002) Relationships between sagittal alignment of the cervical spine and morphology of the spinal cord and clinical outcomes in patients with cervical spondylotic myelopathy treated with expansive laminoplasty. J Spinal Disord Tech 15:391–397

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Dugoni DE, Mancarella C, Landi A, Tarantino R, Ruggeri AG, Delfini R (2014) Post laminoplasty cervical kyphosis-Case report. Int J Surg Case Rep 5:853–857

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. Ellwitz J, Roberto R, Gupta M, Mohan V, Klineberg E (2011) Patient and surgeon factors associated with postoperative kyphosis after laminoplasty. Evid Based Spine Care J 2:53–54

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Uchida K, Nakajima H, Sato R, Yayama T, Mwaka ES, Kobayashi S et al (2009) Cervical spondylotic myelopathy associated with kyphosis or sagittal sigmoid alignment: outcome after anterior or posterior decompression. J Neurosurg Spine 11:521–528

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Lao L, Zhong G, Li X, Qian L, Liu Z (2013) Laminoplasty versus laminectomy for multi-level cervical spondylotic myelopathy: a systematic review of the literature. J Orthop Surg Res 8:45

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Lee CK, Shin DA, Yi S, Kim KN, Shin HC, Yoon DH et al (2016) Correlation between cervical spine sagittal alignment and clinical outcome after cervical laminoplasty for ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament. J Neurosurg Spine 24:100–107

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Michael KW, Neustein TM, Rhee JM (2016) Where should a laminoplasty start? The effect of the proximal level on post-laminoplasty loss of lordosis. Spine J 16:737–741

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Sakai K, Yoshii T, Hirai T, Arai Y, Shinomiya K, Okawa A (2017) Impact of the surgical treatment for degenerative cervical myelopathy on the preoperative cervical sagittal balance: a review of prospective comparative cohort between anterior decompression with fusion and laminoplasty. Eur Spine J 26:104–112

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Kim B, Yoon DH, Ha Y, Yi S, Shin DA, Lee CK et al (2016) Relationship between T1 slope and loss of lordosis after laminoplasty in patients with cervical ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament. Spine J 16:219–225

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Kim TH, Lee SY, Kim YC, Park MS, Kim SW (2013) T1 slope as a predictor of kyphotic alignment change after laminoplasty in patients with cervical myelopathy. Spine 38:E992–E997

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Highsmith JM, Dhall SS, Haid RW Jr, Rodts GE, Mummaneni PV (2011) Treatment of cervical stenotic myelopathy: a cost and outcome comparison of laminoplasty versus laminectomy and lateral mass fusion. J Neurosurg Spine 14:619–625

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Yoon ST, Hashimoto RE, Raich A, Shaffrey CI, Rhee JM, Riew KD (2013) Outcomes after laminoplasty compared with laminectomy and fusion in patients with cervical myelopathy: a systematic review. Spine 38:S183–S194

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Orthopedics, National Taiwan University College of Medicine and National Taiwan University Hospital, No. 7, Chung-Shan South Road, Zhong-Zheng District, Taipei City, 100, Taiwan

    Hsuan-Yu Chen, Po-Quang Chen, Ming-Hsiao Hu & Shu-Hua Yang

  2. Institute of Biomedical Engineering, National Taiwan University, Taipei City, Taiwan

    Hsuan-Yu Chen & Feng-Huei Lin

  3. Department of Orthopedic Surgery, National Taiwan University Hospital Hsin-Chu Branch, Hsinchu City, Taiwan

    Hsuan-Yu Chen, Min-Hui Yang & Yen-Po Lin

Authors
  1. Hsuan-Yu Chen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Min-Hui Yang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Yen-Po Lin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Feng-Huei Lin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Po-Quang Chen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Ming-Hsiao Hu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Shu-Hua Yang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Ming-Hsiao Hu or Shu-Hua Yang.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors, their immediate families and any research foundations with which they are affiliated have not received any financial payments or other benefits from any commercial entity related to the subject of this article.

Ethical approval

The research has been approved by the IRB of the authors affiliated institutions. Approval #201701031RINC.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (PPT 1036 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Chen, HY., Yang, MH., Lin, YP. et al. Impact of cervical sagittal parameters and spinal cord morphology in cervical spondylotic myelopathy status post spinous process-splitting laminoplasty. Eur Spine J 29, 1052–1060 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-019-06247-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-019-06247-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation