Effectiveness of 3 Surgical Decompression Strategies for Treatment of Multilevel Cervical Myelopathy in 3 Spinal Centers in China A Retrospective Study

Department of Spine Surgery, The First Municipal People's Hospital of Guangzhou, Affiliated Hospital to The Guangzhou Medical University, People's Republic of China.
Spine (Impact Factor: 2.3). 08/2012; 37(17):1463-9. DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e31824ff9bc
Source: PubMed


Retrospective multicenter study.
To compare clinical outcomes and surgical-related adverse events in patients with multilevel cervical myelopathy (MCM) undergoing simple anterior, simple posterior, or 1-stage posterior-anterior surgical decompression strategies.
Simple anterior, simple posterior, and 1-stage posterior-anterior surgical decompression strategies have been advocated for MCM treatment in both Western and Chinese populations. However, there is limited evidence on whether 1-stage posterior-anterior strategy may offer equal or more advantages than the other 2 strategies for patients with MCM.
A retrospective review of medical records was conducted for 255 patients with MCM who had undergone surgical decompression in 3 Chinese spinal centers from 1999 to 2010. Neurological status, perioperative variables, and surgical complications were assessed. Multiple linear regression was used to evaluate factors associated with the outcomes of each strategy.
Analyses were conducted on a total of 229 patients with MCM undergoing surgical decompression via 1-stage posterior-anterior (68 patients), simple anterior (102 patients), and simple posterior approaches (59 patients). One-stage posterior-anterior approach had the highest Japanese Orthopaedic Association recovery rate after adjusted for age and sex (adjusted mean ± SD: 50.0 ± 3.2, P < 0.001) and additionally adjusted for smoking, duration from onset of symptoms to surgery, comorbidities, preoperative Japanese Orthopaedic Association score, Ishihara's curvature index and Pavlov ratio, operative blood loss, operating time, anterior operated disc levels, and posterior operated levels (adjusted mean ± SD: 51.6 ± 11.6, P < 0.01). Anterior approach had the largest difference between the pre- and postoperative Ishihara's curvature indexes after adjusted for age and sex (adjusted mean ± SD: 5.3 ± 1.0, P < 0.01) and after multivariable adjustment (adjusted mean ± SD: 6.5 ± 2.8, P = 0.003).
One-stage posterior-anterior strategy can be a reliable and effective treatment strategy for MCM in a subgroup of patients with anterior and posterior compression on spinal cord simultaneously.

8 Reads
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Introduction Cervical laminectomy is a reliable tool for posterior decompression in various cervical spine pathologies. Although there is increasing evidence of superior clinical, neurological and radiological outcomes when using anterior cervical decompression, laminectomy can be a valuable tool when combined with instrumented lateral mass fusion for carefully selected indications. Methods Literature review. Results This review article will provide decision-making guidance, technical advices and pitfalls. The technical advice for laminectomy and instrumented lateral mass fusion is illustrated. The authors review the literature on outcomes and complications and suggest indications for the safe and successful application of cervical laminectomy and lateral mass fusion.
    European Spine Journal 05/2013; 24(S2). DOI:10.1007/s00586-013-2838-x · 2.07 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background Spine surgery is widely accepted as an effective management for patients with lumbar disc herniation; however, the factors influencing intraoperative procedure and prognosis are not fully understood. The present study was aimed to identify the factors influencing intraoperative blood loss, postoperative drainage volume, and recovery in patients undergoing spinal surgery. Methods We retrospectively analyzed the clinical data of 183 consecutive patients with lumbar disc herniation who underwent spine surgery. The clinical characteristics, operation procedure, and outcome were documented and the correlations were analyzed. Results There were significant differences between one-level and two-level operations in the bleeding volumes of male (P = 0.005) and female (P = 0.002) patients, and in final drainage of male (P = 0.043) and female (P = 0.003) patients. The blood loss was correlated with the operation duration. There were differences in intraoperative bleeding and final drainage between groups with one-level and two-level operations. Additionally, there were differences in intraoperative autologous blood transfusion among various groups. There were significant differences in intraoperative bleeding between autologous blood transfusion and non-transfusion groups. Conclusions The key factors affecting the intraoperative blood loss and postoperative drainage volume include operation methods, operation duration, blood-transfusion modes, and usage of anticoagulants. These results should be taken into consideration in the attempt to optimize operation procedure and improve post-operative recovery.
    BMC Surgery 06/2015; 15(1). DOI:10.1186/s12893-015-0062-9 · 1.40 Impact Factor