418
Views
2
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Original Article

Surgical treatment of severe multilevel circumferential compressive myelopathy of the cervical spine: is circumferential procedure necessary?

, , , , , & show all
Pages 189-193 | Received 03 Nov 2013, Accepted 04 Sep 2016, Published online: 11 Jan 2017
 

Abstract

Objective: To determine the necessity of circumferential decompression and fusion in patients with severe multilevel cervical spondylotic myelopathy with circumferential cord compression.

Methods: This prospective study involved 51 patients with severe multilevel circumferential cervical myelopathy underwent two-stage circumferential procedure between July 2008 and June 2010. VAS scores, satisfaction surveys and JOA scores and imaging studies were obtained. Twenty-three patients (45.1%) underwent two-stage surgery (group A); the other 28 patients (54.9%) were satisfied with the outcomes after first-stage surgery, and the second-stage surgery was avoided (group B). Age, sex and symptom duration did not differ between the groups.

Results: Patients were followed up for 3–5 years (mean, 42.5 months). In group A, VAS and JOA scores significantly improved from 63.3 and 7.9 to 38.3 and 10.4, respectively, at 3 months after the first-stage operation and 10.2 and 12.7, respectively, at 3 months after the second-stage operation. In group B, the VAS and JOA scores significantly improved from 62.7 and 7.9 to 31.1 and 11.2 respectively, at 3 months and 18.2 and 12.4, respectively at 6 months. Patient satisfaction rate significantly increased from 43.5% after the first-stage operation to 82.6% after the second-stage operation in group A. In group B, this rate was 89.3%. In group A, cervical spine lordosis increased from 12.8° preoperatively to 18.5° (p < .0001) and 19.1° (p > .05) at 3 months after the first-stage and second-stage operations, respectively. In group B, lordosis significantly increased from 12.5° preoperatively to 18.8° at 3 months. The total complication rate did not significantly differ from the rates after a single surgery (either anterior or posterior).

Conclusion: Only 45.1% patients required surgery via both approaches. Therefore, a two-stage procedure is a rational choice and safe procedure. If outcomes are unsatisfactory after the first-stage operation, a second-stage operation can be performed.

Disclosure statement

The authors report no conflicts of interest. The authors alone are responsible for the content and writing of this article.

Reprints and Corporate Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

To request a reprint or corporate permissions for this article, please click on the relevant link below:

Academic Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

Obtain permissions instantly via Rightslink by clicking on the button below:

If you are unable to obtain permissions via Rightslink, please complete and submit this Permissions form. For more information, please visit our Permissions help page.