Abstract：Objective To discuss the feasibility and clinical effect between different cervical spine curvature and the laminoplasty opening size.Methods Seventy-six patients were involved in a retrospective study from February 2012 to January 2014, including of 48 patients of ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament and 28 patients of multisegmental cervical spondylosis. All patients were divided into three groups according to their different curvature: cervical lordosis was less than 10° in group A, group B was more than 40°, group C was between 10° and 40°. According to different laminoplasty opening sizes (LOS), each group was divided into two subgroups, 12 mm (A1) and 10 mm (A2) for group A, 8 mm (B1) and 10 mm (B2) for group B, and 10 mm for group C. The JOA scores were estimated before surgery and one week after operation in each group. Postoperative C5 nerve root palsy occurrence rates were recorded.Results All the patients were followed up from 12.6 to 27 months, with a mean of (19.3±4.7) months. The mean JOA scores of one week after operation compared with preoperation had statistical difference (P<0.05), the mean recovery rate as follows: 50.21%±18.77% of A1, 42.06%±15.21% of A2; 53.53%±13.78% of B1, 57.89%±19.05% of B2; 55.73%±14.59% of C, which showed no statistical significance (all P values>0.05) among the groups. The incidence of C5 nerve root palsy was 0 in group of A1 and A2, 1/9 in B1, 2/7 in B2 and 5.1%(2/39) in C. The incidence of group B2 was higher than other groups, but not statistically significant among groups (Hc=7.322, P>0.05).Conclusions The unilateral open door laminoplasty can achieve good result for multiple cervical spondylosis. It can obtain satisfactory functional recovery and reduce the incidence of C5 nerve root palsy based on different opening size according to different cervical curvature.
陈德纯,杨海松,陈宇,陈德玉,史建刚,许国华,潘孟骁. 依据颈椎曲度确定开门宽度在单开门椎板成形术中的应用[J]. 中华解剖与临床杂志, 2016, 21(4): 281-285.
Chen Dechun, Yang Haisong, Chen Yu, Chen Deyu, Shi Jiangang, Xu Guohua, Pan Mengxiao. The outcome of opening size based on the cervical curvature in laminoplasty. Chinese Journal of Anatomy and Clinics, 2016, 21(4): 281-285.
Lee CK, Shin DA, Yi S, et al. Correlation between cervical spine sagittal alignment and clinical outcome after cervical laminoplasty for ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament[J]. J Neurosurg Spine, 2016, 24(1): 100-107. DOI:10.3171/2015.4.SPINE141004
Gu Z, Zhang A, Shen Y, et al. Relationship between the laminoplasty opening size and the laminoplasty opening angle, increased sagittal canal diameter and the prediction of spinal canal expansion following open-door cervical laminoplasty[J]. Eur Spine J, 2015, 24(8): 1613-1620. DOI:10.1007/s00586-015-3779-3.
[5]
Yamanaka K, Tachibana T, Moriyama T, et al. C-5 palsy after cervical laminoplasty with instrumented posterior fusion[J]. J Neurosurg Spine, 2014, 20(1): 1-4. DOI:10.3171/2013.9.SPINE12952.
[6]
Takenaka S, Hosono N, Mukai Y, et al. Significant reduction in the incidence of C5 palsy after cervical laminoplasty using chilled irrigation water[J]. Bone Joint J, 2016, 98-B(1): 117-124. DOI:10.1302/0301-620X.98B1.36042.
[7]
Gu Y, Cao P, Gao R, et al. Incidence and risk factors of C5 palsy following posterior cervical decompression: a systematic Review[J]. PLoS ONE, 2014, 9(8): e101933. DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0101933.
[8]
Luo J, Cao K, Huang S, et al. Comparison of anterior approach versus posterior approach for the treatment of multilevel cervical spondylotic myelopathy[J]. Eur Spine J, 2015, 24(8): 1621-1630. DOI:10.1007/s00586-015-3911-4.
Wang L, Wang Y, Yu B, et al. Open-door versus French-door laminoplasty for the treatment of cervical multilevel compressive myelopathy[J]. J Clin Neurosci, 2015, 22(3): 450-455. DOI: 10.1016/j.jocn.2014.08.022.
[11]
Oshima Y, Miyoshi K, Mikami Y, et al. Long-term outcomes of cervical laminoplasty in the elderly[J]. Biomed Res Int, 2015, 2015: 713952. DOI: 10.1155/2015/713952.
[12]
Suda K, Abumi K, Ito M, et al. Local kyphosis reduces surgical outcomes of expansive open-door laminoplasty for cervical spondylotic myelopathy[J]. Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 2003, 28(12): 1258-1262. DOI: 10.1097/01.BRS.0000065487.82469.D9.
[13]
Yamazaki A ,Homma T, Uchiyama S, et al. Morphologic limitations of posterior decompression by midsagittal splitting method for myelopathy caused by ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament in the cervical spine[J]. Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 1999, 24(1): 32-34. DOI:10.1097/00007632-199901010-00008.
[14]
Tashjian VS, Kohan E, McArthur DL, et al. The relationship between preoperative cervical alignment and postoperative spinal cord drift after decompressive laminectomy and arthrodesis for cervical spondylotic myelopathy[J]. Surg Neurol, 2009, 72(2): 112-117. DOI:10.1016/j.surneu.2009.02.024.
[15]
Wang XY, Dai LY, Xu HZ, et al. Prediction of spinal canal expansion following cervical laminoplasty: a computer simulated comparison between single and double-door techniques[J]. Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 2006, 31(24): 2863-2870. DOI: 10.1097/01.brs.0000245851.55012.f1.
[16]
Itoh T, Tsuji H. Technical improvements and results of laminoplasty for compressive myelopathy in the cervical spine[J]. Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 1985, 10(8): 729-736. DOI:10.1097/00007632-198510000-00007.
[17]
Sodeyama T, Goto S, Moehizuki M, et al. Effect of decompression enlargement laminoplasty for posterior shifting of the spinal cord[J]. Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 1999, 24(15): 1527-1532. DOI:10.1097/00007632-199908010-00005.
[18]
Hatta Y, Shiraishi T, Hase H,et al. Is posterior spinal cord shifting by extensive posterior decompression clinically significant for multisegmental cervical spondylotic myelopathy?[J]. Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 2005, 30(21): 2414-2419. DOI: 10.1097/01.brs.0000184751.80857.3e.
2016, Vol. 21 
