Skip to main page content
Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
, 6 (7), 702-709

Outcomes Following Laminoplasty or Laminectomy and Fusion in Patients With Myelopathy Caused by Ossification of the Posterior Longitudinal Ligament: A Systematic Review

Affiliations
Review

Outcomes Following Laminoplasty or Laminectomy and Fusion in Patients With Myelopathy Caused by Ossification of the Posterior Longitudinal Ligament: A Systematic Review

Weerasak Singhatanadgige et al. Global Spine J.

Abstract

Study Design Systematic review. Objective To compare laminoplasty versus laminectomy and fusion in patients with cervical myelopathy caused by OPLL. Methods A systematic review was conducted using PubMed/Medline, Cochrane database, and Google scholar of articles. Only comparative studies in humans were included. Studies involving cervical trauma/fracture, infection, and tumor were excluded. Results Of 157 citations initially analyzed, 4 studies ultimately met our inclusion criteria: one class of evidence (CoE) II prospective cohort study and three CoE III retrospective cohort studies. The prospective cohort study found no significant difference between laminoplasty and laminectomy and fusion in the recovery rate from myelopathy. One CoE III retrospective cohort study reported a significantly higher recovery rate following laminoplasty. Another CoE III retrospective cohort study reported a significantly higher recovery rate in the laminectomy and fusion group. One CoE II prospective cohort study and one CoE III retrospective cohort study found no significant difference in pain improvement between patients treated with laminoplasty versus patients treated with laminectomy and fusion. All four studies reported a higher incidence of C5 palsy following laminectomy and fusion than laminoplasty. One CoE II prospective cohort and one CoE III retrospective cohort reported that there was no significant difference in axial neck pain between the two procedures. One CoE III retrospective cohort study suggested that there was no significant difference between groups in OPLL progression. Conclusion Data from four comparative studies was not sufficient to support the superiority of laminoplasty or laminectomy and fusion in treating cervical myelopathy caused by OPLL.

Keywords: cervical spine; laminectomy and fusion; laminoplasty; myelopathy; ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament; outcome; surgical treatment.

Conflict of interest statement

Disclosures Weerasak Singhatanadgige: none Worawat Limthongkul: none Frank Valone III: none Wicharn Yingsakmongkol: none K. Daniel Riew: Board member (AOSpine International); Editorial board (Global Spine Journal, Spine Journal, Neurosurgery); Grant (AOSpine, Cerapedics, Medtronic); Honorarium (AOSpine, NASS); Royalties (Medtronic, Biomet); Travel expenses (Broadwater)

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Flowchart showing result of literature search.

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by 4 articles

References

    1. An H S, Al-Shihabi L, Kurd M. Surgical treatment for ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament in the cervical spine. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2014;22(7):420–429. - PubMed
    1. Shinomiya K, Okamoto A, Kamikozuru M, Furuya K, Yamaura I. An analysis of failures in primary cervical anterior spinal cord decompression and fusion. J Spinal Disord. 1993;6(4):277–288. - PubMed
    1. Chiba K, Ogawa Y, Ishii K. et al. Long-term results of expansive open-door laminoplasty for cervical myelopathy—average 14-year follow-up study. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2006;31(26):2998–3005. - PubMed
    1. Wright J G Swiontkowski M F Heckman J D Introducing levels of evidence to the journal J Bone Joint Surg Am 2003. 85-A;11–3. - PubMed
    1. Atkins D, Best D, Briss P A. et al. Grading quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. BMJ. 2004;328(7454):1490. - PMC - PubMed
Feedback