Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Washington University in St. Louis, St. Louis, MO 63110, USA.
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2009 Dec 1;34(25):2760-8. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181b11ee1.
Retrospective review of prospectively collected data.
To identify the cause of failed open-door laminoplasty and to describe the surgical strategies for revision surgery.
Although laminoplasty has become popular, few articles have addressed the cause of failed cervical laminoplasty requiring revision surgery.
All patients who required revision surgery following open-door cervical laminoplasty were identified. Clinical data, method of surgical revision, time between surgeries, Nurick grade, radiologic parameters, and complications were analyzed. Laminoplasty failures were classified into 3 categories: "technique related," "inadequate symptomatic relief after treatment," or "recurrence of symptoms due to disease progression."
A total of 130 patients underwent cervical laminoplasty over a 10-year period (1996-2006), and 12 patients (9.2%) required revision surgery. The mean age was 50.7 years at the time of the index laminoplasty (range, 34-67 years) and 51.8 years (range, 35-70 years) at the time of the revision surgery. Mean duration of symptoms was 7.3 months before the index procedure (range, 2-17 months) and 5.6 months (range, 1-14 months) before revision surgery. The mean time interval between the index procedure and revision surgery was 16.6 months (range, 4-43 months). Of the 12 patients who required revision surgery, 5 had global lordosis of <10 degrees, 4 developed local kyphosis >13 degrees, and 5 had increased degenerative spondylolisthesis. Nonmyelopathic causes resulted in 50% of the revision surgery. Of 12 patients, 3 (25%) required revision surgery due to technique-related factors; 1 (8%) required surgery due to inadequate symptomatic relief after treatment; and 8 (67%) required revision surgery due to disease progression.
Of the 130 patients who underwent cervical laminoplasty over a 10-year period, 12 patients (9.2%) required revision surgery. Although laminoplasty is generally successful, failures due to disease progression, technique-related factors, and inadequate symptomatic relief after treatment can occur. Patients should, therefore, be counseled regarding the potential need for revision surgery when undergoing open-door laminoplasty.
前瞻性收集数据的回顾性研究。
确定开放式门型颈椎板成形术失败的原因,并描述翻修手术的手术策略。
尽管门型颈椎板成形术已得到广泛应用,但很少有文章涉及需要翻修手术的颈椎板成形术失败的原因。
确定所有接受开放式颈椎门型板成形术后需要翻修手术的患者。分析临床资料、手术翻修方法、手术间隔时间、Nurick 分级、影像学参数和并发症。颈椎板成形术失败分为 3 类:“与技术相关”、“治疗后症状无明显缓解”或“因疾病进展导致症状复发”。
10 年间(1996-2006 年)共 130 例患者行颈椎板成形术,其中 12 例(9.2%)需要翻修手术。指数板成形术时的平均年龄为 50.7 岁(范围,34-67 岁),翻修手术时的平均年龄为 51.8 岁(范围,35-70 岁)。指数程序前的平均症状持续时间为 7.3 个月(范围,2-17 个月),翻修手术前为 5.6 个月(范围,1-14 个月)。指数手术与翻修手术之间的平均时间间隔为 16.6 个月(范围,4-43 个月)。12 例需要翻修手术的患者中,5 例寰枢椎后凸角度<10 度,4 例局部后凸角度>13 度,5 例退行性脊椎滑脱加重。非脊髓病变导致 50%的翻修手术。12 例患者中,3 例(25%)因技术相关因素需要翻修手术;1 例(8%)因治疗后症状无明显缓解需要手术;8 例(67%)因疾病进展需要翻修手术。
在 10 年间接受颈椎板成形术的 130 例患者中,有 12 例(9.2%)需要翻修手术。虽然门型颈椎板成形术总体上是成功的,但由于疾病进展、技术相关因素和治疗后症状无明显缓解,可能会发生失败。因此,在进行开放式门型颈椎板成形术时,应向患者咨询潜在的翻修手术需求。