Search

Objective: To evaluate the clinical results of combined expansive open-door laminoplasty by splitting of spinous processes and selective anterior cervical decompression and fusion in treatment of multilevel severe cervical spondylotic myelopathy (CSM). Methods: Twenty-eight patients (16 men and 12 women) underwent one-stage combined expansive open-door laminoplasty and selective anterior decompression and fusion for severe CSM; the average patient age was 51.3 years (range, 32–63 years). Clinical results were assessed by Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) scores, number of finger grip and releases (G and R) in ten seconds, hand-grip strength, visual analog scale (VAS) of axial pain, and C2-C7 angle. Results: There was no worsening of neurological symptoms due to cord injury, cerebrospinal fluid leakage, or wound infection. All cases completed one-year follow-up. The JOA scores, number of G and R in ten seconds, and hand-grip strength were all significantly improved (P < 0.05). Satisfactory decompression was shown by MRI or CT to have been achieved in all cases. The C2-C7 angle did not differ significantly from that found pre-operatively. The axial neck pain score was 2.0 ± 0.1 on VAS. Conclusion: Combined expansive open-door laminoplasty by splitting of spinous processes and selective anterior decompression and fusion achieves complete spinal canal decompression with minimal morbidity; this strategy is effective in improving the surgical outcomes of CSM in one-year follow-up.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the clinical efficacy of mini‐invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) through the Wiltse approach for treating lumbar spondylolytic spondylolisthesis. METHODS: In this retrospective controlled study, 69 cases with lumbar spondylolytic spondylolisthesis treated in Qilu hospital from April to November 2014 were randomly assigned to Wiltse approach (31 cases, 16 male, 15 female; mean age 45.1 years) and traditional approach groups (38 cases, 21 male, 17 female; 47.2 years. In the Wiltse approach group, the affected level was L(4, 5) in 19 cases and L(5)S(1) in 12, 9 of whom had low back pain (LBP) only and 21 both LBP and leg pain. There were 17 cases of I degree and 14 of II degree spondylolisthesis. Pre‐operative Japanese Orthopedic Association (JOA) score was 13.1 ± 2.6; visual analog scale (VAS) for LBP 7.4 ± 1.2; VAS for leg pain 6.1 ± 2.0 and Oswestry disability index (ODI) score 42.2% ± 1.2%. In the traditional approach group, the affected level was L(4, 5) in 22 cases and L(5)S(1) in 16, 11 of whom had LBP only and 27 both LBP and leg pain. There were 21 cases of I degree and 17 of II degree spondylolisthesis. Pre‐operative JOA score was 12.8 ± 1.2; VAS for LBP 6.9 ± 1.1; VAS for leg pain 7.1 ± 2.0 and ODI score 41.2% ± 2.0%. The JOA score, VAS for LBP and leg pain, ODI dynamic X‐rays, CT and/or MR were evaluated 3 and 6 months and 1 year postoperatively. RESULTS: There were no differences in sex, age, affected levels, spondylolisthesis degree, pre‐operative JOA score, VAS for LBP or leg pain and ODI score between the two groups (P > 0.05). The incision length, blood loss and time to achieving exposure were better in the Wiltse approach than the traditional approach group (P < 0.05). The VAS for LBP and muscle atrophy MRI scores were significantly lower in the Wiltse approach than the traditional approach group on Days 1 and 14 and at 1 year follow‐up (P < 0.05). The VAS for leg pain, JOA recovery rate and JOA and ODI scores tended to be lower in the Wiltse approach than the traditional approach group at 1 year follow‐up examinations (no differences statistically significant, P > 0.05). The interbody fusion rate was not significantly different between the groups (P > 0.05). There were no complications of internal fixation in either group. CONCLUSION: TLIF via both approaches has satisfactory clinical efficacy. TLIF through the Wiltse approach significantly reduces the damage of multifidus and postoperative incidence of chronic LBP.