Cargando…

Different Approaches for Treating Multilevel Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy: A Retrospective Study of 153 Cases from a Single Spinal Center

OBJECTIVE: The optimal surgical treatment for multilevel cervical spondylotic myelopathy (MCSM) remains controversial. This study compared the outcomes of three surgical approaches for MSCM treatment, focusing on the efficacy and safety of a combined approach. METHODS: This retrospective study inclu...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Li, Xiumao, Jiang, Liang, Liu, Zhongjun, Liu, Xiaoguang, Zhang, Hua, Zhou, Hua, Wei, Feng, Yu, Miao, Wu, Fengliang
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Public Library of Science 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4604139/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26460488
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0140031
_version_ 1782395012132110336
author Li, Xiumao
Jiang, Liang
Liu, Zhongjun
Liu, Xiaoguang
Zhang, Hua
Zhou, Hua
Wei, Feng
Yu, Miao
Wu, Fengliang
author_facet Li, Xiumao
Jiang, Liang
Liu, Zhongjun
Liu, Xiaoguang
Zhang, Hua
Zhou, Hua
Wei, Feng
Yu, Miao
Wu, Fengliang
author_sort Li, Xiumao
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: The optimal surgical treatment for multilevel cervical spondylotic myelopathy (MCSM) remains controversial. This study compared the outcomes of three surgical approaches for MSCM treatment, focusing on the efficacy and safety of a combined approach. METHODS: This retrospective study included 153 consecutive MCSM patients (100 men, 53 women; mean age ± standard deviation, 55.7 ± 9.4 years) undergoing operations involving ≥3 intervertebral segments. The patients were divided into three groups according to surgical approach: anterior (n = 19), posterior (n = 76), and combined (n = 58). We assessed demographic variables, perioperative parameters, and clinical outcomes ≥12 months after surgery (20.5 ± 7.6 months), including Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) score, improvement, recovery rate, and complications. RESULTS: The anterior group had the most favorable preoperative conditions, including the highest preoperative JOA score (12.95 ± 1.86, p = 0.046). In contrast, the combined group had the highest occupancy ratio (48.0% ± 11.6%, p = 0.002). All groups showed significant neurological improvement at final follow-ups, with JOA recovery rates of 59.7%, 54.6%, and 68.9% in the anterior, posterior, and combined groups, respectively (p = 0.163). After multivariable adjustments, the groups did not have significantly different clinical outcomes (postoperative JOA score, p = 0.424; improvement, p = 0.424; recovery rate, p = 0.080). Further, subgroup analyses of patients with occupancy ratios ≥50% showed similar functional outcomes following the posterior and combined approaches. Overall complication rates did not differ significantly among the three approaches (p = 0.600). Occupancy ratios did not have a significant negative influence on postoperative recovery following the posterior approach. CONCLUSIONS: If applied appropriately, all three approaches are effective for treating MCSM. All three approaches had equivalent neurological outcomes, even in subgroups with high occupancy ratios. Further investigations of surgical approaches to MCSM are needed, particularly prospective multicenter studies with long-term follow-up.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4604139
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher Public Library of Science
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-46041392015-10-20 Different Approaches for Treating Multilevel Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy: A Retrospective Study of 153 Cases from a Single Spinal Center Li, Xiumao Jiang, Liang Liu, Zhongjun Liu, Xiaoguang Zhang, Hua Zhou, Hua Wei, Feng Yu, Miao Wu, Fengliang PLoS One Research Article OBJECTIVE: The optimal surgical treatment for multilevel cervical spondylotic myelopathy (MCSM) remains controversial. This study compared the outcomes of three surgical approaches for MSCM treatment, focusing on the efficacy and safety of a combined approach. METHODS: This retrospective study included 153 consecutive MCSM patients (100 men, 53 women; mean age ± standard deviation, 55.7 ± 9.4 years) undergoing operations involving ≥3 intervertebral segments. The patients were divided into three groups according to surgical approach: anterior (n = 19), posterior (n = 76), and combined (n = 58). We assessed demographic variables, perioperative parameters, and clinical outcomes ≥12 months after surgery (20.5 ± 7.6 months), including Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) score, improvement, recovery rate, and complications. RESULTS: The anterior group had the most favorable preoperative conditions, including the highest preoperative JOA score (12.95 ± 1.86, p = 0.046). In contrast, the combined group had the highest occupancy ratio (48.0% ± 11.6%, p = 0.002). All groups showed significant neurological improvement at final follow-ups, with JOA recovery rates of 59.7%, 54.6%, and 68.9% in the anterior, posterior, and combined groups, respectively (p = 0.163). After multivariable adjustments, the groups did not have significantly different clinical outcomes (postoperative JOA score, p = 0.424; improvement, p = 0.424; recovery rate, p = 0.080). Further, subgroup analyses of patients with occupancy ratios ≥50% showed similar functional outcomes following the posterior and combined approaches. Overall complication rates did not differ significantly among the three approaches (p = 0.600). Occupancy ratios did not have a significant negative influence on postoperative recovery following the posterior approach. CONCLUSIONS: If applied appropriately, all three approaches are effective for treating MCSM. All three approaches had equivalent neurological outcomes, even in subgroups with high occupancy ratios. Further investigations of surgical approaches to MCSM are needed, particularly prospective multicenter studies with long-term follow-up. Public Library of Science 2015-10-13 /pmc/articles/PMC4604139/ /pubmed/26460488 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0140031 Text en © 2015 Li et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are properly credited.
spellingShingle Research Article
Li, Xiumao
Jiang, Liang
Liu, Zhongjun
Liu, Xiaoguang
Zhang, Hua
Zhou, Hua
Wei, Feng
Yu, Miao
Wu, Fengliang
Different Approaches for Treating Multilevel Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy: A Retrospective Study of 153 Cases from a Single Spinal Center
title Different Approaches for Treating Multilevel Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy: A Retrospective Study of 153 Cases from a Single Spinal Center
title_full Different Approaches for Treating Multilevel Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy: A Retrospective Study of 153 Cases from a Single Spinal Center
title_fullStr Different Approaches for Treating Multilevel Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy: A Retrospective Study of 153 Cases from a Single Spinal Center
title_full_unstemmed Different Approaches for Treating Multilevel Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy: A Retrospective Study of 153 Cases from a Single Spinal Center
title_short Different Approaches for Treating Multilevel Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy: A Retrospective Study of 153 Cases from a Single Spinal Center
title_sort different approaches for treating multilevel cervical spondylotic myelopathy: a retrospective study of 153 cases from a single spinal center
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4604139/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26460488
http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0140031
work_keys_str_mv AT lixiumao differentapproachesfortreatingmultilevelcervicalspondyloticmyelopathyaretrospectivestudyof153casesfromasinglespinalcenter
AT jiangliang differentapproachesfortreatingmultilevelcervicalspondyloticmyelopathyaretrospectivestudyof153casesfromasinglespinalcenter
AT liuzhongjun differentapproachesfortreatingmultilevelcervicalspondyloticmyelopathyaretrospectivestudyof153casesfromasinglespinalcenter
AT liuxiaoguang differentapproachesfortreatingmultilevelcervicalspondyloticmyelopathyaretrospectivestudyof153casesfromasinglespinalcenter
AT zhanghua differentapproachesfortreatingmultilevelcervicalspondyloticmyelopathyaretrospectivestudyof153casesfromasinglespinalcenter
AT zhouhua differentapproachesfortreatingmultilevelcervicalspondyloticmyelopathyaretrospectivestudyof153casesfromasinglespinalcenter
AT weifeng differentapproachesfortreatingmultilevelcervicalspondyloticmyelopathyaretrospectivestudyof153casesfromasinglespinalcenter
AT yumiao differentapproachesfortreatingmultilevelcervicalspondyloticmyelopathyaretrospectivestudyof153casesfromasinglespinalcenter
AT wufengliang differentapproachesfortreatingmultilevelcervicalspondyloticmyelopathyaretrospectivestudyof153casesfromasinglespinalcenter