Home | About JCVJS | Editorial board | Ahead of print | Current Issue | Archives | Instructions | Subscribe | Advertise | Contact us |   Login 
Journal of Craniovertebral Junction and Spine
Search Articles   
    
Advanced search   
 


 
   Table of Contents  
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Year : 2019  |  Volume : 10  |  Issue : 2  |  Page : 114-118  

Cervical rotation before and after hinge-door cervical laminoplasty for cervical spondylotic myelopathy


1 Department of Neurosurgery, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India
2 Central Institute of Orthopaedics, Vardhman Mahavir Medical College and Safdarjung Hospital, New Delhi, India
3 Department of Neuroradiology, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India

Date of Web Publication16-Jul-2019

Correspondence Address:
Dr. Sachin A Borkar
Department of Neurosurgery and Gamma Knife, All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS), New Delhi - 110 029
India
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/jcvjs.JCVJS_25_19

Rights and Permissions
   Abstract 


Background: Hinge-Door Cervical laminoplasty is commonly performed procedure in patients with cervical spondylotic myelopathy. Most available studies have established restriction of flexion and extension motion post laminoplasty but the literature on post-laminoplasty axial rotation is sparse.
Objective: To study the axial neck rotation on either side following hinge door cervical laminoplasty.
Materials and Methods: Twenty consecutive patients of cervical spondylotic myelopathy planned for cervical laminoplasty were included in the study. Preoperative and postoperative radiological data was recorded for each patient and analysed by an experienced neuroradiologist. The clinical and radiological follow-up was recorded at 6 months post surgery. All patients underwent standard hinge door C3-C6 laminoplasty preserving the muscle attachments to C2 and C7 vertebra.
Results: There were 13 men and 7 women with a mean age of 60.5 years, age range 58-70 years. The mean preop C1 C2 rotation was 46.5 degrees and mean post-operative C1-C2 rotation was 44.3 degrees. The average subaxial cervical spine rotation was 11.66 degrees preoperatively and 12.47 degrees postoperatively. The global cervical spine rotation was 80.95 degrees preoperatively and 76.82 degrees postoperatively. There is no significant change in segmental, subaxial and global cervical spine rotation following hinge door C3-C6 laminoplasty preserving the muscle attachments to C2 and C7 vertebra.
Conclusion: Cervical laminoplasty preserves cervical ROM and is a motion-preserving surgery as far as axial rotation is concerned.

Keywords: Cervical spondylotic myelopathy, hinge-door laminoplasty, range of motion, rotation


How to cite this article:
Borkar SA, Sreenivasan R, Sharma R, Sinha S, Joseph S L, Garg A, Kale SS. Cervical rotation before and after hinge-door cervical laminoplasty for cervical spondylotic myelopathy. J Craniovert Jun Spine 2019;10:114-8

How to cite this URL:
Borkar SA, Sreenivasan R, Sharma R, Sinha S, Joseph S L, Garg A, Kale SS. Cervical rotation before and after hinge-door cervical laminoplasty for cervical spondylotic myelopathy. J Craniovert Jun Spine [serial online] 2019 [cited 2019 Oct 20];10:114-8. Available from: http://www.jcvjs.com/text.asp?2019/10/2/114/262784




   Introduction Top


Hinge-door cervical laminoplasty is commonly performed procedure in patients with cervical spondylotic myelopathy with good postoperative neurological recovery. However, the procedure has been reported to be associated with postoperative restriction of neck mobility and axial neck pain. Most available studies have established the restriction of flexion and extension motion postlaminoplasty, but the literature on postlaminoplasty axial rotation is sparse.[1],[2],[3] This study was carried out to study the axial neck rotation on either side after hinge-door cervical laminoplasty.


   Materials and Methods Top


The study was carried out in the Department of Neurosurgery, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi; a tertiary care apex referral center. Twenty consecutive patients of cervical spondylotic myelopathy planned for cervical laminoplasty were included in the study. Patients with cervical myelopathy due to other causes such as ossified posterior longitudinal ligament, ankylosing spondylitis, diffuse idiopathic skeletal hyperostosis, rheumatoid arthritis, cervical trauma, and infection were not included in the study. Preoperative and postoperative radiological data were recorded for each patient and analyzed by an experienced neuroradiologist. Senior neuroradiologists then confirmed these measurements. The clinical and radiological follow-up was recorded at 6-month postsurgery. All patients underwent standard hinge-door C3–C6 laminoplasty preserving the muscle attachments to C2 and C7 vertebra. The study protocol was approved by the Institute Ethics Committee.

Computed tomography scan imaging protocol

The scans were performed preoperatively and at 6-month postsurgery on the same computed tomography (CT) scan machine in the neurosciences center on a 128-slice CT scanner, (Somatom Definition Edge, Siemens Healthcare, Germany) at a tube voltage of 140 kV and tube current of 200 mA. The acquisition was done using spiral CT scan with a slice thickness of 0.6 mm and reconstructed at 1 mm in axial, coronal, and sagittal planes in both soft tissue and bone windows. Data were uploaded in Syngo.via workstation (Siemens Healthcare), and measurements were done after fusion with neutral and rotational datasets.

All patients underwent preoperative magnetic resonance imaging cervical spine as per protocol [Figure 1]. For evaluating the axial rotation on the CT scan, all patients were first placed in the supine position. After the initial scan in a neutral position, the patients were instructed to actively rotate their neck on either side as far as possible while keeping their shoulders horizontal [Figure 2]. The preoperative and postoperative C1–T1 rotation angles were measured in both the directions [Figure 3], [Figure 4], [Figure 5].
Figure 1: An illustrative magnetic resonance imaging and computed tomography sagittal section showing cervical spondylotic myelopathy

Click here to view
Figure 2: Assessment of axial rotation at C1–C2 level

Click here to view
Figure 3: Preoperative axial computed tomography sections showing axial range of motion to the right

Click here to view
Figure 4: Preoperative axial computed tomography sections showing axial range of motion to the left

Click here to view
Figure 5: Postoperative axial computed tomography sections showing axial range of motion to the right and the left

Click here to view


Surgical procedure

All patients underwent hinge-door laminoplasty by the Hirabayashi technique. In almost all patients, the decompression was done from C3 to C6. A full-thickness trough was drilled using a high-speed nitrogen drill (Drill size AM8, MIDAS REX, Medtronics) on the lamina on the more symptomatic side, and a partial-thickness trough was drilled on the contralateral side. The ligamentum flavum was removed from the trough. The laminoplasty was secured with miniplates and miniscrews fixed to the lamina and the lateral masses to keep the “door open.” After achieving complete hemostasis, the paraspinal muscles were meticulously repositioned, and the closure was done eliminating any possible dead space. The patients were provided Philadelphia collar for 4–6 weeks in the postoperative period.

Statistical analysis

The data were analyzed using SPSS version 24 (IBM SPSS Statistics version 24 IBM, New York, USA). Paired t-test was used to test the significance of observations obtained. P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.


   Results Top


There were 13 men and 7 women with a mean age of 60.5 years, age range 58–70 years. The mean preoperative modified Japanese Orthopedic Association score was10.0 (range: 8–14). The mean postoperative modified Japanese Orthopedic Association score was14.0 (range: 12–18). There was a mean improvement in postoperative modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association scores by 4 points at 6-month follow-up.

The mean preoperative C1–C2 rotation was 46.5°. The mean preoperativeC2–C3 rotation was 22.8°. Similarly, the preoperative C3–C4 rotation was 18.15°, C4–C5 rotation was 13.23°, C5–C6 rotation was 11.00°, C6–C7 rotation was 9.6°, and C7–T1 rotation was 6.3° [Table 1] and [Figure 6].
Table 1: Mean preoperative and postoperative cervical spine rotation

Click here to view
Figure 6: Segmental rotational range of motion of cervical spine before and after laminoplasty

Click here to view


The mean postoperative C1–C2 rotation was 44.3°, C2–C3 rotation was 20.05°, C3–C4 rotation was 19.65°, C4–C5 rotation was 14.95°, C5–C6 rotation was 11.75°, C6–C7 rotation was 10.00°, and C7–T1 rotation was 6.00° [Table 1] and [Figure 6]. The average subaxial cervical spine rotation was 11.66° preoperatively and 12.47° postoperatively [Figure 7].
Figure 7: Subaxial and global cervical spine rotational range of motion before and after laminoplasty

Click here to view


The global cervical spine rotation was 80.95° preoperatively and 76.82° postoperatively [Figure 7]. There was an insignificant decrease in C1–C2 rotation postoperatively by 2.3°. There was an insignificant decrease in C2–C3 rotation postoperatively by 2.75°. There was an insignificant increase in subaxial cervical spine rotation overall by 0.81° with an insignificant decrease in C7–T1 rotation by 0.3°. This was reflected as a decrease in the global cervical spine rotation by 4.13° [Figure 7].


   Discussion Top


The cervical spine is the most mobile segment of the vertebral column. The assessment of the mobility of cervical spine was a challenge before the advent of functional CT owing to its complex anatomy. Functional CT scan is a useful method to evaluate axial rotation at the atlantoaxial level and the subaxial level.[2] The majority of studies that have studied cervical motion have primarily dealt with the sagittal planar movements of flexion and extension.[4] Hyun et al.[5] reported a decrease in cervical spine range of motion (ROM) by as much as 20% at 6 months following expansive laminoplasty, but they primarily measured flexion and extension by C2–C7 angles on lateral radiographs. The CT scan is vastly superior, as it allows for the visualization of the C7–T1 region that is masked by the shoulders in the lateral radiographs.

Most of the previous studies have reported that cervical ROM decreases significantly following laminoplasty.[1],[3],[5],[6],[7],[8],[9],[10],[11],[12],[13],[14],[15],[16],[17],[18],[19] However, there are only a few studies that have studied cervical rotation on CT scan while evaluating cervical ROM [Table 2].[14],[20],[21]
Table 2: Previous studies which have reported on axial range of motion following laminoplasty

Click here to view


Baba et al.[1] were one of the first investigators to evaluate segmental cervical ROM using lateral radiographs and they found a significant decrease in cervical ROM at all levels, except C2–C3 and C7–T1 at an average of 5.8-year follow-up. It is difficult to accurately assess segmental ROM on functional radiographs, as the increments are often too small. However, even they did not assess cervical rotation.

Takeuchi et al.[21] reported that rotation is much preserved if the semispinalis cervicis insertion is preserved as compared to where it is not. Sugimoto et al.[20] reported in their study that there was a decrease in the rotation angle 2 weeks postlaminoplasty, which recovered to over the next 6 months. Hence, this corroborates with the findings in our study that axial rotation is preserved postlaminoplasty. Nagamoto et al.[14] described C0–T1 ROM in flexion-extension as well as rotation using functional CT scan and found that C0–T1 ROM did not change significantly at 6-month follow-up which corroborates with our finding that there is an insignificant change in the global cervical spine ROM.

We also found that the global cervical spinal rotation decreased slightly despite a marginal increase in the average subaxial cervical spinal rotation. This reaffirmed the fact that 60% of the global cervical rotation occurs at the atlantoaxial joint alone[2] and any decrease in the same affects the global cervical rotation.

Our study is a valuable addition to a scarce literature there is relative preservation of axial ROM if hinge-door laminoplasty is done in an appropriate fashion preserving attachments at C2 and C7.

Limitations of the study

This study was done with the precise objective of assessing cervical axial rotation only. As such global cervical spine ROM, which includes flexion-extension and lateral bending also, was not assessed as there are already studies regarding it. The sample size was small. Further studies are needed with a larger sample size. Furthermore, we did not compare the axial rotation following laminectomy and lateral mass fixation with that following laminoplasty which is the limitation of the current study.


   Conclusion Top


Cervical laminoplasty preserves cervical ROM and is a motion-preserving surgery as far as axial rotation is concerned. The decrease in global cervical spine rotation angle is insignificant if at all it does occur. Subaxial spine rotation angles also do not decrease after laminoplasty. Functional CT scan is the best modality to assess cervical ROM postsurgery.

Financial support and sponsorship

This study was financially supported by AOSpine, India.

Conflicts of interest

There are no conflicts of interest.



 
   References Top

1.
Baba H, Maezawa Y, Furusawa N, Imura S, Tomita K. Flexibility and alignment of the cervical spine after laminoplasty for spondylotic myelopathy. A radiographic study. Int Orthop 1995;19:116-21.  Back to cited text no. 1
    
2.
Dvorak J, Hayek J, Zehnder R. CT-functional diagnostics of the rotatory instability of the upper cervical spine. Part 2. An evaluation on healthy adults and patients with suspected instability. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1987;12:726-31.  Back to cited text no. 2
    
3.
Fujimori T, Le H, Ziewacz JE, Chou D, Mummaneni PV. Is there a difference in range of motion, neck pain, and outcomes in patients with ossification of posterior longitudinal ligament versus those with cervical spondylosis, treated with plated laminoplasty? Neurosurg Focus 2013;35:E9.  Back to cited text no. 3
    
4.
Ratliff JK, Cooper PR. Cervical laminoplasty: A critical review. J Neurosurg 2003;98:230-8.  Back to cited text no. 4
    
5.
Hyun SJ, Rhim SC, Roh SW, Kang SH, Riew KD. The time course of range of motion loss after cervical laminoplasty: A prospective study with minimum two-year follow-up. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2009;34:1134-9.  Back to cited text no. 5
    
6.
Heller JG, Edwards CC 2nd, Murakami H, Rodts GE. Laminoplasty versus laminectomy and fusion for multilevel cervical myelopathy: An independent matched cohort analysis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2001;26:1330-6.  Back to cited text no. 6
    
7.
Highsmith JM, Dhall SS, Haid RW Jr., Rodts GE Jr., Mummaneni PV. Treatment of cervical stenotic myelopathy: A cost and outcome comparison of laminoplasty versus laminectomy and lateral mass fusion. J Neurosurg Spine 2011;14:619-25.  Back to cited text no. 7
    
8.
Iizuka H, Iizuka Y, Nakagawa Y, Nakajima T, Toda N, Shimegi A, et al. Interlaminar bony fusion after cervical laminoplasty: Its characteristics and relationship with clinical results. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2006;31:644-7.  Back to cited text no. 8
    
9.
Kang SH, Rhim SC, Roh SW, Jeon SR, Baek HC. Postlaminoplasty cervical range of motion: Early results. J Neurosurg Spine 2007;6:386-90.  Back to cited text no. 9
    
10.
Kawaguchi Y, Matsui H, Ishihara H, Gejo R, Yasuda T. Surgical outcome of cervical expansive laminoplasty in patients with diabetes mellitus. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2000;25:551-5.  Back to cited text no. 10
    
11.
Kimura I, Shingu H, Nasu Y. Long-term follow-up of cervical spondylotic myelopathy treated by canal-expansive laminoplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1995;77:956-61.  Back to cited text no. 11
    
12.
Maeda T, Arizono T, Saito T, Iwamoto Y. Cervical alignment, range of motion, and instability after cervical laminoplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2002;(401):132-8.  Back to cited text no. 12
    
13.
Matz PG, Anderson PA, Groff MW, Heary RF, Holly LT, Kaiser MG, et al. Cervical laminoplasty for the treatment of cervical degenerative myelopathy. J Neurosurg Spine 2009;11:157-69.  Back to cited text no. 13
    
14.
Nagamoto Y, Iwasaki M, Sugiura T, Fujimori T, Matsuo Y, Kashii M, et al. In vivo 3D kinematic changes in the cervical spine after laminoplasty for cervical spondylotic myelopathy. J Neurosurg Spine 2014;21:417-24.  Back to cited text no. 14
    
15.
Satomi K, Nishu Y, Kohno T, Hirabayashi K. Long-term follow-up studies of open-door expansive laminoplasty for cervical stenotic myelopathy. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1994;19:507-10.  Back to cited text no. 15
    
16.
Seichi A, Takeshita K, Ohishi I, Kawaguchi H, Akune T, Anamizu Y, et al. Long-term results of double-door laminoplasty for cervical stenotic myelopathy. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2001;26:479-87.  Back to cited text no. 16
    
17.
Takeuchi K, Yokoyama T, Ono A, Numasawa T, Wada K, Kumagai G, et al. Limitations of activities of daily living accompanying reduced neck mobility after cervical laminoplasty. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 2007;127:475-80.  Back to cited text no. 17
    
18.
Tomita K, Kawahara N, Toribatake Y, Heller JG. Expansive midline T-saw laminoplasty (modified spinous process-splitting) for the management of cervical myelopathy. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1998;23:32-7.  Back to cited text no. 18
    
19.
Wada E, Suzuki S, Kanazawa A, Matsuoka T, Miyamoto S, Yonenobu K. Subtotal corpectomy versus laminoplasty for multilevel cervical spondylotic myelopathy: A long-term follow-up study over 10 years. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2001;26:1443-7.  Back to cited text no. 19
    
20.
Sugimoto Y, Tanaka M, Nakanishi K, Misawa H, Takigawa T, Ikuma H, et al. Assessing range of cervical rotation after laminoplasty using axial CT. J Spinal Disord Tech 2007;20:187-9.  Back to cited text no. 20
    
21.
Takeuchi K, Yokoyama T, Ono A, Numasawa T, Wada K, Itabashi T, et al. Limitation of activities of daily living accompanying reduced neck mobility after laminoplasty preserving or reattaching the semispinalis cervicis into axis. Eur Spine J 2008;17:415-20.  Back to cited text no. 21
    


    Figures

  [Figure 1], [Figure 2], [Figure 3], [Figure 4], [Figure 5], [Figure 6], [Figure 7]
 
 
    Tables

  [Table 1], [Table 2]



 

Top
  
 
  Search
 
    Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
    Access Statistics
    Email Alert *
    Add to My List *
* Registration required (free)  

 
  In this article
    Abstract
   Introduction
    Materials and Me...
   Results
   Discussion
   Conclusion
    References
    Article Figures
    Article Tables

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed218    
    Printed17    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded0    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal