Lee Chang-Hyun, Lee Jaebong, Kang James D, Hyun Seung-Jae, Kim Ki-Jeong, Jahng Tae-Ahn, Kim Hyun-Jib
1Department of Neurosurgery, Spine Center, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seongnam;
2Department of Neurosurgery, Konyang University Hospital, Konyang University College of Medicine, Daejeon;
J Neurosurg Spine. 2015 Jun;22(6):589-95. doi: 10.3171/2014.10.SPINE1498. Epub 2015 Mar 27.
OBJECT Posterior cervical surgery, expansive laminoplasty (EL) or laminectomy followed by fusion (LF), is usually performed in patients with multilevel (≥ 3) cervical spondylotic myelopathy (CSM). However, the superiority of either of these techniques is still open to debate. The aim of this study was to compare clinical outcomes and postoperative kyphosis in patients undergoing EL versus LF by performing a meta-analysis. METHODS Included in the meta-analysis were all studies of EL versus LF in adults with multilevel CSM in MEDLINE (PubMed), EMBASE, and the Cochrane library. A random-effects model was applied to pool data using the mean difference (MD) for continuous outcomes, such as the Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) grade, the cervical curvature index (CCI), and the visual analog scale (VAS) score for neck pain. RESULTS Seven studies comprising 302 and 290 patients treated with EL and LF, respectively, were included in the final analyses. Both treatment groups showed slight cervical lordosis and moderate neck pain in the baseline state. Both groups were similarly improved in JOA grade (MD 0.09, 95% CI -0.37 to 0.54, p = 0.07) and neck pain VAS score (MD -0.33, 95% CI -1.50 to 0.84, p = 0.58). Both groups evenly lost cervical lordosis. In the LF group lordosis seemed to be preserved in long-term follow-up studies, although the difference between the 2 treatment groups was not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS Both EL and LF lead to clinical improvement and loss of lordosis evenly. There is no evidence to support EL over LF in the treatment of multilevel CSM. Any superiority between EL and LF remains in question, although the LF group shows favorable long-term results.
目的 后路颈椎手术,即扩大椎板成形术(EL)或椎板切除术后融合术(LF),通常用于治疗多节段(≥3节段)颈椎脊髓型颈椎病(CSM)患者。然而,这两种技术中任何一种的优越性仍存在争议。本研究的目的是通过进行荟萃分析,比较接受EL与LF治疗的患者的临床结局和术后后凸畸形情况。方法 纳入荟萃分析的是MEDLINE(PubMed)、EMBASE和Cochrane图书馆中所有关于成人多节段CSM患者EL与LF对比的研究。采用随机效应模型,使用连续结局的平均差(MD)来汇总数据,如日本骨科协会(JOA)分级、颈椎曲度指数(CCI)以及颈部疼痛的视觉模拟量表(VAS)评分。结果 最终分析纳入了7项研究,分别有302例和290例患者接受了EL和LF治疗。两个治疗组在基线状态时均表现为轻度颈椎前凸和中度颈部疼痛。两组在JOA分级(MD 0.09,95%CI -0.37至0.54,p = 0.07)和颈部疼痛VAS评分(MD -0.33,95%CI -1.50至0.84,p = 0.58)方面改善程度相似。两组均出现颈椎前凸均匀丢失。在长期随访研究中,LF组的前凸似乎得以保留,尽管两个治疗组之间的差异无统计学意义。结论 EL和LF均能带来临床改善且颈椎前凸丢失程度相当。在多节段CSM的治疗中,没有证据支持EL优于LF。EL和LF之间的任何优越性仍存在疑问,尽管LF组显示出良好的长期结果。