Decompressive cervical laminectomy and lateral mass screw-rod arthrodesis. Surgical analysis and outcome

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>This study evaluates the outcome and complications of decompressive cervical Laminectomy and lateral mass screw fixation in 110 cases treated for variable cervical spine pathologies that included; degenerative disease, trauma, neoplasms, metabolic-inflammatory disorders and congenital anomalies.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>A retrospective review of total 785 lateral mass screws were placed in patients ages 16-68 years (40 females and 70 males). All cases were performed with a polyaxial screw-rod construct and screws were placed by using Anderson-Sekhon trajectory. Most patients had 12-14-mm length and 3.5 mm diameter screws placed for subaxial and 28-30 for C1 lateral mass. Screw location was assessed by post operative plain x-ray and computed tomography can (CT), besides that; the facet joint, nerve root foramen and foramen transversarium violation were also appraised.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>No patients experienced neural or vascular injury as a result of screw position. Only one patient needed screw repositioning. Six patients experienced superficial wound infection. Fifteen patients had pain around the shoulder of C5 distribution that subsided over the time. No patients developed screw pullouts or symptomatic adjacent segment disease within the period of follow up.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>decompressive cervical spine laminectomy and Lateral mass screw stabilization is a technique that can be used for a variety of cervical spine pathologies with safety and efficiency.</p

Anterior versus posterior approach to treat cervical spondylotic myelopathy, clinical and radiological results with long period of follow-up

Background: Cervical spondylotic myelopathy increases with age, but not all cases are symptomatic. It is usually diagnosed clinically and radiologically (X-ray and magnetic resonance imaging). Surgical treatment is indicated in severe symptomatic cases, while treatment controversy exists in the presence of less severe cases. Anterior and posterior approaches are generally used for decompression with no significant differences in the results of both. Methods: A total of 287 patients of cervical spondylotic myelopathy were treated at our hospital between January 2004 and December 2015. Only 140 patients were eligible for our study. They had at least 5 years of follow-up using full clinical scores and radiological evaluation. They were divided into two groups: group I with 73 patients (aged 23–79 years) underwent posterior decompression, lateral mass instrumentation, and fusion, while group II with 67 patients (aged 33–70 years) underwent anterior decompression, instrumentation, and fusion. Neck Disability Index, local score, and X-ray were used in the evaluation of the patients. Results: Preoperative mean ± standard deviation of Neck Disability Index of both the groups was 32.06 ± 6.33 and 29.88 ± 5.48, which improved in the last visit (>5 years) to 5.81 ± 7.39 and 2.94 ± 5.48 for groups I and II, respectively (p value <0.05). The local score of groups I and II was (P = 1, F = 21, G = 31, E = 19) and (P = 1, F = 12, G = 36, E = 18), which on discharge day improved to (P = 1, F = 4, G = 12, E = 55) and (P = 0, F = 3, G = 6, E = 58) at last follow-up, respectively. Fusion rate was nearly equal for both the groups during all the follow-up intervals and it was 91.1% and 91.7% in the last follow-up. Conclusion: There were no significant differences in the clinical and radiological results between the anterior and posterior approaches used in the surgical treatment of spondylotic cervical myelopathy. However, statistically significant results of Neck Disability Index of anterior approach were not clinically important and may be due to changes in the size and shape of the neck in group II