Clinical Investigation of the Association of Opening Size with Sagittal Canal Diameter Based on Single-Door Cervical Laminoplasty

Background Many clinical studies have assessed the association of laminoplasty opening size (LOS) with sagittal canal diameter (SCD) based on single-door cervical laminoplasty (SDCL). Nevertheless, the “worn-off” lamina extracted in SDCL was neglected in these reports. We aimed to develop a simple mathematical model to analyze the relationship between the effective LOS and SCD, taking into consideration the worn-off lamina. Material/Methods A total of 106 patients treated by SDCL at our hospital were included in this study. Pre-operative and post-operative SCDs were assessed using a picture archiving and communication system (PACS) based on computed tomography scans. Mini-plate sizes as well as drill bit diameters were recorded in detail in order to determine the effective LOS for each vertebral lamina involved. Results SCD in all patients was increased significantly after SDCL (P<0.01). A linear correlation was found between effective LOS and the post-operative SCD increment from C3 to C7 (R2>0.933, P<0.001). The 12 mm mini-plate was most often used in SDCL, accounting for 64.45% of all cases, whereas 10 mm and 16 mm mini-plates were the least used, accounting for 3.85% and 3.00%, respectively. Conclusions There is a strong linear correlation between effective LOS and the post-operative SCD increment. The SCD was increased by about 0.5 mm per mm increase in effective LOS. Thus, post-operative SCD could be precisely calculated and predicted, enabling the selection of optimal mini-plate prior to SDCL.

[1]  Yang Zhang,et al.  Relationship of actual laminoplasty opening size and increment of the cross-sectional area based on single-door cervical laminoplasy , 2018, Medicine.

[2]  Bin Xu,et al.  Expansive open-door laminoplasty versus laminectomy and instrumented fusion for cases with cervical ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament and straight lordosis , 2017, European Spine Journal.

[3]  Jian-ming Huang,et al.  A prospective randomized trial comparing anterior cervical discectomy and fusion versus plate-only open-door laminoplasty for the treatment of spinal stenosis in degenerative diseases , 2017, European Spine Journal.

[4]  Hui Xu,et al.  Safety and efficacy of cervical laminoplasty using a piezosurgery device compared with a high-speed drill , 2016, Medicine.

[5]  Pengfei Rong,et al.  Prognosis of posterior osteophyte after anterior cervical decompression and fusion in patients with cervical spondylotic myelopathy using three-dimensional computed tomography study , 2016, European Spine Journal.

[6]  Tao Li,et al.  Multivariate Analysis of Factors Associated With Axial Symptoms in Unilateral Expansive Open-Door Cervical Laminoplasty With Miniplate Fixation , 2016, Medicine.

[7]  Tao Li,et al.  Effect of Mini-plate Fixation on Hinge Fracture and Bony Fusion in Unilateral Open-door Cervical Expansive Laminoplasty , 2014, Clinical spine surgery.

[8]  W. Ding,et al.  Relationship between the laminoplasty opening size and the laminoplasty opening angle, increased sagittal canal diameter and the prediction of spinal canal expansion following open-door cervical laminoplasty , 2015, European Spine Journal.

[9]  A. Nowacki,et al.  Predicting C5 palsy via the use of preoperative anatomic measurements. , 2014, The spine journal : official journal of the North American Spine Society.

[10]  Tzai-Chiu Yu,et al.  Expansive open-door laminoplasty secured with titanium miniplates is a good surgical method for multiple-level cervical stenosis , 2014, Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research.

[11]  S. Kim,et al.  Is cervical lordosis relevant in laminoplasty? , 2013, The spine journal : official journal of the North American Spine Society.

[12]  K. Riew,et al.  Range of motion loss after cervical laminoplasty: a prospective study with minimum 5-year follow-up data. , 2013, The spine journal : official journal of the North American Spine Society.

[13]  W. Ding,et al.  Long-term impacts of different posterior operations on curvature, neurological recovery and axial symptoms for multilevel cervical degenerative myelopathy , 2013, European Spine Journal.

[14]  Michael Y. Wang,et al.  A Prospective, Randomized Trial Comparing Expansile Cervical Laminoplasty and Cervical Laminectomy and Fusion for Multilevel Cervical Myelopathy , 2012, Neurosurgery.

[15]  A. L. Petraglia,et al.  Cervical Laminoplasty as a Management Option for Patients With Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy: A Series of 40 Patients , 2010, Neurosurgery.

[16]  Y. Matsuyama,et al.  A MULTICENTRE STUDY , 2010 .

[17]  P. Rao,et al.  Dynamic Plates in Anterior Cervical Fusion Surgery: Graft Settling and Cervical Alignment , 2009, Spine.

[18]  Xiang-Yang Wang,et al.  Prediction of Spinal Canal Expansion Following Cervical Laminoplasty: A Computer-Simulated Comparison Between Single and Double-Door Techniques , 2006, Spine.

[19]  T. Kubo,et al.  Is Posterior Spinal Cord Shifting by Extensive Posterior Decompression Clinically Significant for Multisegmental Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy? , 2005, Spine.

[20]  K. Hayashi,et al.  Posterior movement and enlargement of the spinal cord after cervical laminoplasty. , 1998, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. British volume.

[21]  M. O’Brien,et al.  A Novel Technique for Laminoplasty Augmentation of Spinal Canal Area Using Titanium Miniplate Stabilization: A Computerized Morphometric Analysis , 1996, Spine.

[22]  H. Tsuji,et al.  Technical Improvements and Results of Laminoplasty for Compressive Myelopathy in the Cervical Spine , 1985, Spine.