Centerpiece plate vs. Arch plate fixation in cervical unilateral open-door laminoplasty: a retrospective comparative study.

IF 1.6 4区医学 Q2 SURGERY

Frontiers in Surgery Pub Date : 2025-02-06 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.3389/fsurg.2025.1482974

Lishuang Huo, Fengyu Liu, Xianze Sun

{"title":"Centerpiece plate vs. Arch plate fixation in cervical unilateral open-door laminoplasty: a retrospective comparative study.","authors":"Lishuang Huo, Fengyu Liu, Xianze Sun","doi":"10.3389/fsurg.2025.1482974","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose: To compare the clinical and radiological outcomes of Centerpiece plate and Arch plate fixation in cervical unilateral open-door laminoplasty.Methods: This study included 102 patients who underwent cervical unilateral open-door laminoplasty with Centerpiece plate fixation (62 patients) or Arch plate fixation (40 patients) between September 2017 and September 2022. Clinical and radiological outcomes were evaluated.Results: There were no significant differences in operation time, blood loss, and lamina open angle between the two groups. Before surgery, the two groups had comparable Japanese Orthopedic Association (JOA) scores and Pavlov's ratios. After surgery, the spinal drift distance and Pavlov ratio of the Centerpiece group were smaller than those of the Arch group. Both groups showed significant improvements in JOA scores after surgery and at the last follow-up compared to pre-surgery. At the final follow-up, the Centerpiece group's JOA scores and JOA score improvement rate were lower than those of the Arch group.Conclusions: Both Centerpiece plate and Arch plate fixation can improve the patient's symptoms. Centerpiece plate fixation has a worse prognosis than Arch plate fixation in cervical unilateral open-door laminoplasty because the ventral prong in the Centerpiece plate may obstruct the spinal cord's backward movement.","PeriodicalId":12564,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in Surgery","volume":"12 ","pages":"1482974"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11839675/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/fsurg.2025.1482974","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: To compare the clinical and radiological outcomes of Centerpiece plate and Arch plate fixation in cervical unilateral open-door laminoplasty.

Methods: This study included 102 patients who underwent cervical unilateral open-door laminoplasty with Centerpiece plate fixation (62 patients) or Arch plate fixation (40 patients) between September 2017 and September 2022. Clinical and radiological outcomes were evaluated.

Results: There were no significant differences in operation time, blood loss, and lamina open angle between the two groups. Before surgery, the two groups had comparable Japanese Orthopedic Association (JOA) scores and Pavlov's ratios. After surgery, the spinal drift distance and Pavlov ratio of the Centerpiece group were smaller than those of the Arch group. Both groups showed significant improvements in JOA scores after surgery and at the last follow-up compared to pre-surgery. At the final follow-up, the Centerpiece group's JOA scores and JOA score improvement rate were lower than those of the Arch group.

Conclusions: Both Centerpiece plate and Arch plate fixation can improve the patient's symptoms. Centerpiece plate fixation has a worse prognosis than Arch plate fixation in cervical unilateral open-door laminoplasty because the ventral prong in the Centerpiece plate may obstruct the spinal cord's backward movement.

查看原文本刊更多论文

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Frontiers in Surgery Medicine-Surgery

CiteScore

1.90

自引率

11.10%

发文量

1872

审稿时长

12 weeks

期刊介绍： Evidence of surgical interventions go back to prehistoric times. Since then, the field of surgery has developed into a complex array of specialties and procedures, particularly with the advent of microsurgery, lasers and minimally invasive techniques. The advanced skills now required from surgeons has led to ever increasing specialization, though these still share important fundamental principles. Frontiers in Surgery is the umbrella journal representing the publication interests of all surgical specialties. It is divided into several “Specialty Sections” listed below. All these sections have their own Specialty Chief Editor, Editorial Board and homepage, but all articles carry the citation Frontiers in Surgery. Frontiers in Surgery calls upon medical professionals and scientists from all surgical specialties to publish their experimental and clinical studies in this journal. By assembling all surgical specialties, which nonetheless retain their independence, under the common umbrella of Frontiers in Surgery, a powerful publication venue is created. Since there is often overlap and common ground between the different surgical specialties, assembly of all surgical disciplines into a single journal will foster a collaborative dialogue amongst the surgical community. This means that publications, which are also of interest to other surgical specialties, will reach a wider audience and have greater impact. The aim of this multidisciplinary journal is to create a discussion and knowledge platform of advances and research findings in surgical practice today to continuously improve clinical management of patients and foster innovation in this field.