PDF herunterladen
CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Indian Journal of Neurosurgery 2018; 07(01): 008-015
DOI: 10.1055/s-0038-1651532
Review Article
Thieme Medical and Scientific Publishers Private Ltd.

Anterior Cervical Corpectomy and the Operating Team: A Controversy?

Alexandrina Nikova
1   Department of Neurosurgery, Democritus University of Thrace, Alexandroupolis, Greece
,
Theodossios Birbilis
1   Department of Neurosurgery, Democritus University of Thrace, Alexandroupolis, Greece
› Institutsangaben
Weitere Informationen

Publikationsverlauf

Publikationsdatum:
15. Mai 2018 (online)

   Lizenzen und Reprints

Abstract

Cervical myelopathy is multifactorial disease that can lead to many dysfunctions. Surgical treatment is believed to be the best healing choice. The authors searched the published data on Medline on this subject and found a difference between the neurosurgeons and orthopaedics on the topic of anterior corpectomy for cervical myelopathy. The difference between the orthopaedics and neurosurgeons is not big, but it could be relevant to the final outcome, which appears to be better in the neurosurgeons. The complication rate is also variable between the groups, with lower rates of complication reported by the neurosurgeons. Therefore, despite the fact that the postoperative outcome depends on many factors, such as preoperative condition, additional comorbidities, age, and lifestyle, this article also finds that the surgical team, after comparing basic techniques that the team used for anterior cervical corpectomy (ACC), is also responsible to some extent. This, however, is not a competition, and future cooperation between the teams might be beneficial for all.

Keywords

cervical myelopathy - improvement - outcome - surgery - quality of life
 

  • References

  • 1 Emery SE. Cervical spondylotic myelopathy: diagnosis and treatment. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 2001; 9 (06) 376-388
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Rhee JM, Shamji MF, Erwin WM. et al. Nonoperative management of cervical myelopathy: a systematic review. Spine 2013; 38 (22) Suppl 1) S55-S67
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Komotar RJ, Mocco J, Kaiser MG. Surgical management of cervical myelopathy: indications and techniques for laminectomy and fusion. Spine J 2006; 6 (06) Suppl) 252S-267S
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Lao L, Zhong G, Li X, Qian L, Liu Z. Laminoplasty versus laminectomy for multi-level cervical spondylotic myelopathy: a systematic review of the literature. J Orthop Surg 2013; 8: 45
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Geck MJ, Eismont FJ. Surgical options for the treatment of cervical spondylotic myelopathy. Orthop Clin North Am 2002; 33 (02) 329-348
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Emery SE. Anterior approaches for cervical spondylotic myelopathy: which? When? How?. Eur Spine J 2015; 24 Suppl 2) 150-159
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Yalamanchili PK, Vives MJ, Chaudhary SB. Cervical spondylotic myelopathy: factors in choosing the surgical approach. Adv Orthop 2012; 2012: 783762
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Hussain M, Nassr A, Natarajan RN, An HS, Andersson GB. Corpectomy versus discectomy for the treatment of multilevel cervical spine pathology: a finite element model analysis. Spine J 2012; 12 (05) 401-408
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Uribe JS, Sangala JR, Duckworth EA, Vale FL. Comparison between anterior cervical discectomy fusion and cervical corpectomy fusion using titanium cages for reconstruction: analysis of outcome and long-term follow-up. Eur Spine J 2009; 18 (05) 654-662
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Williams KE, Paul R, Dewan Y. Functional outcome of corpectomy in cervical spondylotic myelopathy. Indian J Orthop 2009; 43 (02) 205-209
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Fehlings MG, Arvin B. Surgical management of cervical degenerative disease: the evidence related to indications, impact, and outcome. J Neurosurg Spine 2009; 11 (02) 97-100
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Zaïri F, Aboukais R, Thines L, Allaoui M, Assaker R. Relevance of expandable titanium cage for the treatment of cervical spondylotic myelopathy. Eur Spine J 2012; 21 (08) 1545-1550
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Acosta Jr FL, Aryan HE, Chou D, Ames CP. Long-term biomechanical stability and clinical improvement after extended multilevel corpectomy and circumferential reconstruction of the cervical spine using titanium mesh cages. J Spinal Disord Tech 2008; 21 (03) 165-174
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Shaker AS, Addosooki AI, El-Deen MA. Anterior cervical corpectomy with free vascularized fibular graft versus multilevel discectomy and grafting for cervical spondylotic myelopathy. Int J Spine Surg 2015; 9: 60
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Koç RK, Menkü A, Akdemir H, Tucer B, Kurtsoy A, Oktem IS. Cervical spondylotic myelopathy and radiculopathy treated by oblique corpectomies without fusion. Neurosurg Rev 2004; 27 (04) 252-258
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Naderi S, Alberstone CD, Rupp FW, Benzel EC, Baldwin NG. Cervical spondylotic myelopathy treated with corpectomy: technique and results in 44 patients. Neurosurg Focus 1996; 1 (06) e5 discussion 1, e5
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Aramomi M, Masaki Y, Koshizuka S. et al. Anterior pedicle screw fixation for multilevel cervical corpectomy and spinal fusion. Acta Neurochir (Wien) 2008; 150 (06) 575-582 discussion 582
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Shibuya S, Komatsubara S, Oka S, Kanda Y, Arima N, Yamamoto T. Differences between subtotal corpectomy and laminoplasty for cervical spondylotic myelopathy. Spinal Cord 2010; 48 (03) 214-220
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Thakar S, Mohan D, Furtado SV. et al. Paraspinal muscle morphometry in cervical spondylotic myelopathy and its implications in clinicoradiological outcomes following central corpectomy: clinical article. J Neurosurg Spine 2014; 21 (02) 223-230
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Lee HY, Lee SH, Son HK. et al. Comparison of multilevel oblique corpectomy with and without image guided navigation for multi-segmental cervical spondylotic myelopathy. Comput Aided Surg 2011; 16 (01) 32-37
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Chibbaro S, Benvenuti L, Carnesecchi S. et al. Anterior cervical corpectomy for cervical spondylotic myelopathy: experience and surgical results in a series of 70 consecutive patients. J Clin Neurosci 2006; 13 (02) 233-238
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Lin Q, Zhou X, Wang X, Cao P, Tsai N, Yuan W. A comparison of anterior cervical discectomy and corpectomy in patients with multilevel cervical spondylotic myelopathy. Eur Spine J 2012; 21 (03) 474-481
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Costa F, Tomei M, Sassi M. et al. Evaluation of the rate of decompression in anterior cervical corpectomy using an intra-operative computerized tomography scan (O-Arm system). Eur Spine J 2012; 21 (02) 359-363
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Rocchi G, Caroli E, Salvati M, Delfini R. Multilevel oblique corpectomy without fusion: our experience in 48 patients. Spine 2005; 30 (17) 1963-1969
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Turel MK, Sarkar S, Prabhu K, Daniel RT, Jacob KS, Chacko AG. Reduction in range of cervical motion on serial long-term follow-up in patients undergoing oblique corpectomy for cervical spondylotic myelopathy. Eur Spine J 2013; 22 (07) 1509-1516
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Chang HC, Tu TH, Chang HK. et al. Hybrid corpectomy and disc arthroplasty for cervical spondylotic myelopathy caused by ossification of posterior longitudinal ligament and disc herniation. World Neurosurg 2016; 95: 22-30
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Gao R, Yang L, Chen H, Liu Y, Liang L, Yuan W. Long term results of anterior corpectomy and fusion for cervical spondylotic myelopathy. PLoS One 2012; 7 (04) e34811
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Huang JJ, Niu CC, Chen LH, Lai PL, Fu TS, Chen WJ. Anterior cervical spinal surgery for multilevel cervical myelopathy. Chang Gung Med J 2004; 27 (07) 531-541
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Yang X, Chen Q, Liu L. et al. Comparison of anterior cervical fusion by titanium mesh cage versus nano-hydroxyapatite/polyamide cage following single-level corpectomy. Int Orthop 2013; 37 (12) 2421-2427
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Liu J, Chen X, Liu Z, Long X, Huang S, Shu Y. Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion versus corpectomy and fusion in treating two-level adjacent cervical spondylotic myelopathy: a minimum 5-year follow-up study. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 2015; 135 (02) 149-153
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Lau D, Chou D, Mummaneni PV. Two-level corpectomy versus three-level discectomy for cervical spondylotic myelopathy: a comparison of perioperative, radiographic, and clinical outcomes. J Neurosurg Spine 2015; 23 (03) 280-289
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Ozer AF, Oktenoglu T, Cosar M, Sasani M, Sarioglu AC. Long-term follow-up after open-window corpectomy in patients with advanced cervical spondylosis and/or ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament. J Spinal Disord Tech 2009; 22 (01) 14-20
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Yan D, Wang Z, Deng S, Li J, Soo C. Anterior corpectomy and reconstruction with titanium mesh cage and dynamic cervical plate for cervical spondylotic myelopathy in elderly osteoporosis patients. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 2011; 131 (10) 1369-1374
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Fengbin Y, Jinhao M, Xinyuan L, Xinwei W, Yu C, Deyu C. Evaluation of a new type of titanium mesh cage versus the traditional titanium mesh cage for single-level, anterior cervical corpectomy and fusion. Eur Spine J 2013; 22 (12) 2891-2896
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 35 Mao N, Wu J, Zhang Y. et al. A comparison of anterior cervical corpectomy and fusion combined with artificial disc replacement and cage fusion in patients with multilevel cervical spondylotic myelopathy. Spine 2015; 40 (16) 1277-1283
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 36 Duzkalir AH, Istemen I, Okutan MO, Ozdogan S, Senturk S, Yildirim T. Clinical results of median corpectomy in cervical spondylotic patients with myelopathy. Turk Neurosurg 2014; 26 (01) 1-8
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 37 Epstein NE. Reoperation rates for acute graft extrusion and pseudarthrosis after one-level anterior corpectomy and fusion with and without plate instrumentation: etiology and corrective management. Surg Neurol 2001; 56 (02) 73-80 discussion 80–81
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 38 Epstein NE, Silvergleide RS. Documenting fusion following anterior cervical surgery: a comparison of roentgenogram versus two-dimensional computed tomographic findings. J Spinal Disord Tech 2003; 16 (03) 243-247
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 39 Ernestus RI, Koehler S, Raslan F, Rueckriegel SM, Stetter C, Westermaier T. Autologous bone graft versus PEKK cage for vertebral replacement after 1- or 2-level anterior median corpectomy. J Neurosurg Spine 2016; 24: 309-314
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 40 Niu CC, Hai Y, Fredrickson BE, Yuan HA. Anterior cervical corpectomy and strut graft fusion using a different method. Spine J 2002; 2 (03) 179-187
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 41 Perrini P, Gambacciani C, Martini C, Montemurro N, Lepori P. Anterior cervical corpectomy for cervical spondylotic myelopathy: reconstruction with expandable cylindrical cage versus iliac crest autograft. A retrospective study. Clin Neurol Neurosurg 2015; 139: 258-263
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 42 Li Z, Guo Z, Hou S. et al. Segmental anterior cervical corpectomy and fusion with preservation of middle vertebrae in the surgical management of 4-level cervical spondylotic myelopathy. Eur Spine J 2014; 23 (07) 1472-1479
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 43 Gupta A, Rajshekhar V. Functional and radiological outcome in patients undergoing three level corpectomy for multi-level cervical spondylotic myelopathy and ossified posterior longitudinal ligament. Neurol India 2016; 64 (01) 90-96
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 44 Lu T, Liu C, Yang B. et al. Single-level anterior cervical corpectomy and fusion using a new 3D-printed anatomy-adaptive titanium mesh cage for treatment of cervical spondylotic myelopathy and ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament: a retrospective case series study. Med Sci Monit 2017; 23: 3105-3114
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 45 Li Z, Huang J, Zhang Z, Li F, Hou T, Hou S. A comparison of multilevel anterior cervical discectomy and corpectomy in patients with 4-level cervical spondylotic myelopathy: a minimum 2-year follow-up study: multilevel anterior cervical discectomy. Clin Spine Surg 2017; 30 (05) E540-E546
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 46 Liu Y, Yu KY, Hu JH. Hybrid decompression technique and two-level corpectomy are effective treatments for three-level cervical spondylotic myelopathy. J Zhejiang Univ Sci B 2009; 10 (09) 696-701
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 47 Tateiwa Y, Kamimura M, Itoh H. et al. Multilevel subtotal corpectomy and interbody fusion using a fibular bone graft for cervical myelopathy due to ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament. J Clin Neurosci 2003; 10 (02) 199-207
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 48 Zhang Y, Quan Z, Zhao Z. et al. Evaluation of anterior cervical reconstruction with titanium mesh cages versus nano-hydroxyapatite/polyamide66 cages after 1- or 2-level corpectomy for multilevel cervical spondylotic myelopathy: a retrospective study of 117 patients. PLoS One 2014; 9 (05) e96265
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 49 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 2001; 26 (13) 1443-1447 discussion 1448
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 50 Kristof RA, Kiefer T, Thudium M. et al. Comparison of ventral corpectomy and plate-screw-instrumented fusion with dorsal laminectomy and rod-screw-instrumented fusion for treatment of at least two vertebral-level spondylotic cervical myelopathy. Eur Spine J 2009; 18 (12) 1951-1956
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 51 Kimura H, Shikata J, Odate S, Soeda T. Anterior corpectomy and fusion to C2 for cervical myelopathy: clinical results and complications. Eur Spine J 2014; 23 (07) 1491-1501
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 52 Odate S, Shikata J, Kimura H, Soeda T. Hybrid decompression and fixation technique versus plated 3-vertebra corpectomy for 4-segment cervical myelopathy: analysis of 81 cases with a minimum 2-year follow-up. Clin Spine Surg 2016; 29 (06) 226-233
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 53 Kotil K, Tari R. Two level cervical corpectomy with iliac crest fusion and rigid plate fixation: a retrospective study with a three-year follow-up. Turk Neurosurg 2011; 21 (04) 606-612
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 54 Kumar GS, Rajshekhar V. Acute graft extrusion following central corpectomy in patients with cervical spondylotic myelopathy and ossified posterior longitudinal ligament. J Clin Neurosci 2009; 16 (03) 373-377
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 55 Lu J, Wu X, Li Y, Kong X. Surgical results of anterior corpectomy in the aged patients with cervical myelopathy. Eur Spine J 2008; 17 (01) 129-135
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 56 Vedantam A, Revanappa KK, Rajshekhar V. Changes in the range of motion of the cervical spine and adjacent segments at ≥24 months after uninstrumented corpectomy for cervical spondylotic myelopathy. Acta Neurochir (Wien) 2011; 153 (05) 995-1001
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 57 Fessler RG, Steck JC, Giovanini MA. Anterior cervical corpectomy for cervical spondylotic myelopathy. Neurosurgery 1998; 43 (02) 257-265 discussion 265–267
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 58 George B, Gauthier N, Lot G. Multisegmental cervical spondylotic myelopathy and radiculopathy treated by multilevel oblique corpectomies without fusion. Neurosurgery 1999; 44 (01) 81-90
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 59 Saunders RL, Bernini PM, Shirreffs Jr TG, Reeves AG. Central corpectomy for cervical spondylotic myelopathy: a consecutive series with long-term follow-up evaluation. J Neurosurg 1991; 74 (02) 163-170
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 60 Lian XF, Xu JG, Zeng BF, Zhou W, Kong WQ, Hou TS. Noncontiguous anterior decompression and fusion for multilevel cervical spondylotic myelopathy: a prospective randomized control clinical study. Eur Spine J 2010; 19 (05) 713-719
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 61 Wang T, Tian XM, Liu SK, Wang H, Zhang YZ, Ding WY. Prevalence of complications after surgery in treatment for cervical compressive myelopathy: a meta-analysis for last decade. Medicine (Baltimore) 2017; 96 (12) e6421
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 62 Ying Z, Xinwei W, Jing Z. et al. Cervical corpectomy with preserved posterior vertebral wall for cervical spondylotic myelopathy: a randomized control clinical study. Spine 2007; 32 (14) 1482-1487
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 63 Cheng SC, Yen CH, Kwok TK, Wong WC, Mak KH. Anterior spinal fusion versus laminoplasty for cervical spondylotic myelopathy: a retrospective review. J Orthop Surg (Hong Kong) 2009; 17 (03) 265-268
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 64 Witiw CD, Tetreault LA, Smieliauskas F, Kopjar B, Massicotte EM, Fehlings MG. Surgery for degenerative cervical myelopathy: a patient-centered quality of life and health economic evaluation. Spine J 2017; 17 (01) 15-25
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 65 Liu T, Xu W, Cheng T, Yang HL. Anterior versus posterior surgery for multilevel cervical myelopathy, which one is better? A systematic review. Eur Spine J 2011; 20 (02) 224-235
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 66 Arnold PM, Kopjar B, Tetreault L, Nakashima H, Fehlings MG. 162 Tobacco smoking and outcomes of surgical decompression in patients with symptomatic degenerative cervical spondylotic myelopathy. Neurosurgery 2016; 63 Suppl 1) 165
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 67 Rao RD, Gourab K, David KS. Operative treatment of cervical spondylotic myelopathy. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2006; 88 (07) 1619-1640
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 68 Machino M, Yukawa Y, Hida T. et al. Can elderly patients recover adequately after laminoplasty?: a comparative study of 520 patients with cervical spondylotic myelopathy. Spine 2012; 37 (08) 667-671
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 69 Fehlings MG, Wilson JR, Kopjar B. et al. Efficacy and safety of surgical decompression in patients with cervical spondylotic myelopathy: results of the AOSpine North America prospective multi-center study. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2013; 95 (18) 1651-1658
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 70 He X, Li H, Liu J, Xu S, Zhang L. The surgical approaches of cervical spondylotic myelopathy and the predictive factors for the surgical outcome. Int J Clin Med 2011; 2 (02) 158-165
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar