What is the best strategy for C3 in open-door laminoplasty: laminectomy versus laminoplasty-a systematic review and meta-analysis.

IF 4.9 1区 医学 Q1 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Chun-Ru Lin, Sung Huang Laurent Tsai, Po-An Tsai, Yi-Jun Chen, Ming-Hao Chen, Sz-An Tsai, Lin-Sheng Hsu, Kuo-Hao Lee, Zhi Yi Lee, Fu-Cheng Kao, Ming-Kai Hsieh, Tsung-Ting Tsai, Po-Liang Lai, Tsai-Sheng Fu, Chi-Chien Niu, Ping-Yeh Chiu
{"title":"What is the best strategy for C3 in open-door laminoplasty: laminectomy versus laminoplasty-a systematic review and meta-analysis.","authors":"Chun-Ru Lin, Sung Huang Laurent Tsai, Po-An Tsai, Yi-Jun Chen, Ming-Hao Chen, Sz-An Tsai, Lin-Sheng Hsu, Kuo-Hao Lee, Zhi Yi Lee, Fu-Cheng Kao, Ming-Kai Hsieh, Tsung-Ting Tsai, Po-Liang Lai, Tsai-Sheng Fu, Chi-Chien Niu, Ping-Yeh Chiu","doi":"10.1016/j.spinee.2025.01.034","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Conventional open-door laminoplasty is commonly used to treat multilevel cervical disorders but often leads to complications such as loss of cervical lordosis, limited neck motion, and axial symptoms. These issues stem from the extensive disruption of musculature and structural alterations involved in conventional methods. To address these shortcomings, the modified open-door laminoplasty with C3 laminectomy technique has been developed as a modification of conventional open-door laminoplasty, with the aims to preserve the semispinalis cervicis muscle attached to the C2 spinous process, potentially improving postoperative outcomes by maintaining muscle integrity and stability of the cervical spine.</p><p><strong>Purpose: </strong>This study seeks to evaluate the clinical benefits of modified open-door laminoplasty with C3 laminectomy in comparison to conventional open-door laminoplasty approaches.</p><p><strong>Study design/setting: </strong>Patient Sample: patients undergoing open-door laminoplasty OUTCOME MEASURES: The outcome measures assessed were categoried into self-report Measure including pain indices, physiologic measures including complications, and functional measures including operative time, Neck Disability Index (NDI), Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) scores, length of hospital stay, and cervical range of motion (ROM).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a comprehensive search across multiple databases, including PubMed, Scopus, EMBASE, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library, to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs), cohort studies, and case-control studies that compare the clinical outcomes of conventional open-door laminoplasty and modified open-door laminoplasty with C3 laminectomy. Statistical analyses were performed using RevMan software to evaluate the differences between the 2 surgical techniques.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Our analysis included 11 studies encompassing 873 participants. The meta-analysis revealed no significant differences between patients undergoing conventional open-door laminoplasty and modified open-door laminoplasty with C3 laminectomy regarding operation time (mean difference, MD: 5.08, 95% confidence interval, CI: -3.04 to 13.21), length of hospital stay (MD: -0.33, 95% CI: -1.43 to 0.77), JOA scores (MD: 0.18, 95% CI: -0.03 to 0.40), NDI scores (MD: -0.14, 95% CI: -4.00 to 3.72), and complication rates (risk difference, RD: 0.01, 95% CI: -0.03 to 0.04). However, participants in the group that underwent modified open-door laminoplasty with C3 laminectomy exhibited a significantly greater range of motion (MD: 4.13, 95% CI: 0.07 to 7.20) and lower postoperative pain scores (standard mean difference, SMD: -0.57, 95% CI: -1.05 to -0.10).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our study suggests that modified open-door laminoplasty with C3 laminectomy improves range of motion and reduces pain compared to conventional open-door laminoplasty, with no differences in other clinical outcomes. Further studies are needed to confirm these results.</p>","PeriodicalId":49484,"journal":{"name":"Spine Journal","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Spine Journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spinee.2025.01.034","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Conventional open-door laminoplasty is commonly used to treat multilevel cervical disorders but often leads to complications such as loss of cervical lordosis, limited neck motion, and axial symptoms. These issues stem from the extensive disruption of musculature and structural alterations involved in conventional methods. To address these shortcomings, the modified open-door laminoplasty with C3 laminectomy technique has been developed as a modification of conventional open-door laminoplasty, with the aims to preserve the semispinalis cervicis muscle attached to the C2 spinous process, potentially improving postoperative outcomes by maintaining muscle integrity and stability of the cervical spine.

Purpose: This study seeks to evaluate the clinical benefits of modified open-door laminoplasty with C3 laminectomy in comparison to conventional open-door laminoplasty approaches.

Study design/setting: Patient Sample: patients undergoing open-door laminoplasty OUTCOME MEASURES: The outcome measures assessed were categoried into self-report Measure including pain indices, physiologic measures including complications, and functional measures including operative time, Neck Disability Index (NDI), Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) scores, length of hospital stay, and cervical range of motion (ROM).

Methods: We conducted a comprehensive search across multiple databases, including PubMed, Scopus, EMBASE, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library, to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs), cohort studies, and case-control studies that compare the clinical outcomes of conventional open-door laminoplasty and modified open-door laminoplasty with C3 laminectomy. Statistical analyses were performed using RevMan software to evaluate the differences between the 2 surgical techniques.

Results: Our analysis included 11 studies encompassing 873 participants. The meta-analysis revealed no significant differences between patients undergoing conventional open-door laminoplasty and modified open-door laminoplasty with C3 laminectomy regarding operation time (mean difference, MD: 5.08, 95% confidence interval, CI: -3.04 to 13.21), length of hospital stay (MD: -0.33, 95% CI: -1.43 to 0.77), JOA scores (MD: 0.18, 95% CI: -0.03 to 0.40), NDI scores (MD: -0.14, 95% CI: -4.00 to 3.72), and complication rates (risk difference, RD: 0.01, 95% CI: -0.03 to 0.04). However, participants in the group that underwent modified open-door laminoplasty with C3 laminectomy exhibited a significantly greater range of motion (MD: 4.13, 95% CI: 0.07 to 7.20) and lower postoperative pain scores (standard mean difference, SMD: -0.57, 95% CI: -1.05 to -0.10).

Conclusion: Our study suggests that modified open-door laminoplasty with C3 laminectomy improves range of motion and reduces pain compared to conventional open-door laminoplasty, with no differences in other clinical outcomes. Further studies are needed to confirm these results.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Spine Journal
Spine Journal 医学-临床神经学
CiteScore
8.20
自引率
6.70%
发文量
680
审稿时长
13.1 weeks
期刊介绍: The Spine Journal, the official journal of the North American Spine Society, is an international and multidisciplinary journal that publishes original, peer-reviewed articles on research and treatment related to the spine and spine care, including basic science and clinical investigations. It is a condition of publication that manuscripts submitted to The Spine Journal have not been published, and will not be simultaneously submitted or published elsewhere. The Spine Journal also publishes major reviews of specific topics by acknowledged authorities, technical notes, teaching editorials, and other special features, Letters to the Editor-in-Chief are encouraged.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信