Impact of Cervical Micro-Endoscopic Laminotomy on Postoperative Neck Pain and Range of Motion: A Case-Control Study.

IF 2.6 2区 医学 Q2 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Spine Pub Date : 2025-02-18 DOI:10.1097/BRS.0000000000005305
Hiroshi Kobayashi, Takuya Nikaido, Kazuyuki Watanabe, Kinshi Kato, Yoshihiro Kobayashi, Masataka Nakamura, Miho Sekiguchi, Michiyuki Hakozaki, Takuya Kameda, Yoichi Kaneuchi, Koji Otani, Shoji Yabuki, Shin-Ichi Konno, Yoshihiro Matsumoto
{"title":"Impact of Cervical Micro-Endoscopic Laminotomy on Postoperative Neck Pain and Range of Motion: A Case-Control Study.","authors":"Hiroshi Kobayashi, Takuya Nikaido, Kazuyuki Watanabe, Kinshi Kato, Yoshihiro Kobayashi, Masataka Nakamura, Miho Sekiguchi, Michiyuki Hakozaki, Takuya Kameda, Yoichi Kaneuchi, Koji Otani, Shoji Yabuki, Shin-Ichi Konno, Yoshihiro Matsumoto","doi":"10.1097/BRS.0000000000005305","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Study design: </strong>Retrospective case-control study.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To evaluate clinical outcomes of cervical microendoscopic laminotomy (CMEL) and segmental partial laminectomy (SPL) in patients with cervical spondylotic myelopathy (CSM).</p><p><strong>Summary of background data: </strong>CSM often requires posterior decompression surgery. Conventional techniques such as laminoplasty and SPL are associated with significant challenges, including axial neck pain and reduced cervical range of motion (ROM). In contrast, CMEL, a minimally invasive approach, may offer superior outcomes. However, direct comparisons with SPL remain limited.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We retrospectively analyzed 105 patients (58 with CMEL and 47 with SPL) who underwent posterior decompression surgery for CSM between 2003 and 2020. The evaluated outcomes included intraoperative parameters, postoperative clinical measures (e.g., Neck Disability Index (NDI), Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) scores, including recovery rate and treatment satisfaction), radiographic assessments, and complication rates.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Compared to SPL, CMEL resulted in reduced blood loss, shorter hospital stay, less postoperative neck pain, ROM preservation, and fewer complications at 1 year postoperatively.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>CMEL is a minimally invasive alternative to SPL, providing reduced morbidity and improved outcomes. This is particularly true for aging populations that require functional preservation and quality of life improvement. By avoiding instruments such as interlaminar spacers and implants, CMEL can potentially reduce healthcare costs.</p>","PeriodicalId":22193,"journal":{"name":"Spine","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Spine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0000000000005305","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Study design: Retrospective case-control study.

Objective: To evaluate clinical outcomes of cervical microendoscopic laminotomy (CMEL) and segmental partial laminectomy (SPL) in patients with cervical spondylotic myelopathy (CSM).

Summary of background data: CSM often requires posterior decompression surgery. Conventional techniques such as laminoplasty and SPL are associated with significant challenges, including axial neck pain and reduced cervical range of motion (ROM). In contrast, CMEL, a minimally invasive approach, may offer superior outcomes. However, direct comparisons with SPL remain limited.

Methods: We retrospectively analyzed 105 patients (58 with CMEL and 47 with SPL) who underwent posterior decompression surgery for CSM between 2003 and 2020. The evaluated outcomes included intraoperative parameters, postoperative clinical measures (e.g., Neck Disability Index (NDI), Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) scores, including recovery rate and treatment satisfaction), radiographic assessments, and complication rates.

Results: Compared to SPL, CMEL resulted in reduced blood loss, shorter hospital stay, less postoperative neck pain, ROM preservation, and fewer complications at 1 year postoperatively.

Conclusions: CMEL is a minimally invasive alternative to SPL, providing reduced morbidity and improved outcomes. This is particularly true for aging populations that require functional preservation and quality of life improvement. By avoiding instruments such as interlaminar spacers and implants, CMEL can potentially reduce healthcare costs.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Spine
Spine 医学-临床神经学
CiteScore
5.90
自引率
6.70%
发文量
361
审稿时长
6.0 months
期刊介绍: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins is a leading international publisher of professional health information for physicians, nurses, specialized clinicians and students. For a complete listing of titles currently published by Lippincott Williams & Wilkins and detailed information about print, online, and other offerings, please visit the LWW Online Store. Recognized internationally as the leading journal in its field, Spine is an international, peer-reviewed, bi-weekly periodical that considers for publication original articles in the field of Spine. It is the leading subspecialty journal for the treatment of spinal disorders. Only original papers are considered for publication with the understanding that they are contributed solely to Spine. The Journal does not publish articles reporting material that has been reported at length elsewhere.
×
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