Leni & Peter May Department of Orthopaedics, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY.
Clin Spine Surg. 2022 May 1;35(4):181-186. doi: 10.1097/BSD.0000000000001311. Epub 2022 Mar 29.
This was a retrospective cohort study.
The objective of this study was to investigate whether cervical laminectomy with instrumented fusion (LF) and cervical laminoplasty with reconstruction (LP) are associated with different rates C5 palsy (C5P) at 1-month follow-up in a single surgeon and nationally representative cohort.
LF and LP both carry a well-known risk of nerve root injury that most commonly presents as C5P which can reduce patient satisfaction, patient function, and impede patient recovery. The procedure type that is more frequently associated with C5P remains largely unclear.
We identified patients undergoing primary LF or LP procedures for the treatment of cervical myelopathy in both a single-surgeon series cohort (2004-2018; Mount Sinai Hospital) and a nationally representative cohort drawn from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) database (2006-2017). For the single-surgeon cohort, C5P within 1 month of surgery was recorded. For the NSQIP cohort, peripheral nerve injury (PNI) within 1 month of surgery was recorded and used as a proxy for C5P. Postoperative complications including C5P were compared between cohorts. Multivariable logistic regression was used to evaluate the association between procedure type and postoperative C5P or PNI.
Without adjusting for covariates, LF patients had a higher rate of 1-month C5P in the single-surgeon cohort (8% vs. 0%, P=0.01). An adjusted odds ratio could not be obtained due to the absence of C5P in the LP group. In the national cohort, LP patients had a significantly higher rate of 1-month PNI on unadjusted analysis (11% vs. 16%, P<0.001). After adjusting for covariates, we found no significant difference in odds of 1-month PNI between LF and LP (adjusted odds ratio=0.84, P=0.07).
Overall, the single-surgeon series suggest that cervical LF is associated with significantly higher rates of postoperative C5P as compared with LP. These findings are not corroborated by nationally representative data, which showed no difference in PNI rates between LF and LP. A surgeon's training and experience likely contribute to which procedure has a higher propensity for a C5P as a complication. Regardless, both LF and LP patients should be closely monitored for new-onset C5P during follow-up visits.
Level III.
这是一项回顾性队列研究。
本研究的目的是探讨在单一外科医生和全国代表性队列中,颈椎板切除术伴器械融合(LF)和颈椎板切除术伴重建(LP)是否与术后 1 个月时不同的 C5 神经病(C5P)发生率有关。
LF 和 LP 都有众所周知的神经根损伤风险,最常见的表现为 C5P,这会降低患者满意度、功能,并阻碍患者康复。哪种手术方式更常导致 C5P 仍不清楚。
我们在单一外科医生系列队列(2004-2018;西奈山医院)和来自美国外科医师学会全国手术质量改进计划(NSQIP)数据库的全国代表性队列(2006-2017)中确定了接受原发性 LF 或 LP 手术治疗颈椎脊髓病的患者。对于单一外科医生队列,记录术后 1 个月内的 C5P。对于 NSQIP 队列,记录术后 1 个月内的周围神经损伤(PNI),并将其作为 C5P 的替代指标。比较两组之间术后并发症(包括 C5P)。多变量逻辑回归用于评估手术类型与术后 C5P 或 PNI 之间的关联。
在未调整协变量的情况下,LF 患者在单一外科医生队列中的 1 个月 C5P 发生率更高(8%比 0%,P=0.01)。由于 LP 组中没有 C5P,无法获得调整后的优势比。在全国队列中,未经调整分析显示 LP 患者术后 1 个月 PNI 的发生率显著更高(11%比 16%,P<0.001)。调整协变量后,我们发现 LF 和 LP 之间 1 个月 PNI 的几率无显著差异(调整后的优势比=0.84,P=0.07)。
总体而言,单一外科医生系列研究表明,颈椎 LF 与术后 C5P 的发生率明显高于 LP。这些发现与全国代表性数据不一致,后者显示 LF 和 LP 之间 PNI 发生率无差异。外科医生的培训和经验可能会影响哪种手术更有可能出现 C5P 作为并发症。无论如何,LF 和 LP 患者在随访期间都应密切监测新出现的 C5P。
III 级。