Posterior Cervical Laminoplasty Using a New Plating System: Technical Note

Background: Laminoplasty is well described in the Japanese literature as a surgical option for treating ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament (OPLL). The open door technique has gained increasing popularity in the United States and Europe to treat not only OPLL but also cervical stenotic myelopathy. An obstacle to its widespread use is the lack of a suitable fixation plate to adequately secure the fractured lamina to the lateral mass. Our objective was to demonstrate the advantages of a novel miniplate (Ti-Mesh LP system; Medtronic Sofamor Danek, Memphis, TN, USA) that is ideally suited for fixing the lamina to the lateral mass. Methods: We used the Ti-Mesh LP miniplate system to perform laminoplasties on five patients, all male, with a mean preoperative Nurick score of 2.8. Four patients had congenital cervical stenosis with myelopathy and one had OPLL. Open door laminoplasties were performed on all patients. The plates were implanted with a claw positioned on the trapdoor lamina and a flat plate on the lateral mass. Results: The system was implanted successfully in all patients. The mean number of levels fixated was 4.4. There were no intraoperative or postoperative complications after >5 months follow-up. Conclusions: The new Ti-Mesh LP cranial miniplate and screw system facilitates posterior cervical laminoplasty procedures by eliminating the need to contour cranial miniplates for use in the cervical spine. Its unique claw construct and angled design are ideal for holding a trapdoor laminoplasty in the open position. We have used this system successfully and without complications to perform decompressive posterior cervical laminoplasties in five patients.

[1]  E. Frank,et al.  A technique for cervical laminoplasty using mini plates. , 1994, British journal of neurosurgery.

[2]  M. Fehlings,et al.  Posterior plates in the management of cervical instability: long-term results in 44 patients. , 1994, Journal of neurosurgery.

[3]  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.

[4]  S. Katoh,et al.  Spinal deformity following surgery for spinal cord tumors and tumorous lesions: analysis based on an assessment of the spinal functional curve , 1996, Spinal Cord.

[5]  K. Wakano,et al.  Expansive Open‐Door Laminoplasty for Cervical Spinal Stenotic Myelopathy , 1983, Spine.

[6]  E. Laws,et al.  Pathogenesis and prophylaxis of postlaminectomy deformity of the spine after multiple level laminectomy: difference between children and adults. , 1981, Neurosurgery.

[7]  A. R. Walsh,et al.  Spinal Sagittal Malalignment following Surgery for Primary Intramedullary Tumours in Children , 2001, Pediatric Neurosurgery.

[8]  R. E. Kinard,et al.  Posterior Cervical Arthrodesis and Stabilization With a Lateral Mass Plate: Clinical and Computed Tomographic Evaluation of Lateral Mass Screw Placement and Associated Complications , 1996, Spine.

[9]  C. Edwards,et al.  Laminoplasty Versus Laminectomy and Fusion for Multilevel Cervical Myelopathy: An Independent Matched Cohort Analysis , 2001, Spine.

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

[11]  N. Simmons,et al.  Incidence and outcome of kyphotic deformity following laminectomy for cervical spondylotic myelopathy. , 2000, Journal of neurosurgery.