Aggravation and subsequent disappearance of cervical disc herniation after cervical open-door laminoplasty: A case report

Best cutoff score of cervical-pedicle thickness as a morphological parameter for predicting cervical central stenosis

There are various factors for the cause of cervical central stenosis (CCS), such as osteophyte, cervical-disc degeneration, and cervical ligamentum flavum hypertrophy. However, the pedicle of the cervical vertebra has not yet been analyzed for its relationship with CCS. We created a new morphologic parameter called the cervical-pedicle thickness (CPT) to assess the association between CCS and the cervical pedicle. We obtained morphological cases involving the CPT from 82 patients with CCS. There were also 84 in the normal group who underwent cervical spine magnetic resonance imaging (CS-MR) as part of routine health screening. We obtained the T2-weighted CS-MR axial images from group members, and assessed the CPT at the level of the C6 vertebra on CS-MR. The mean CPT was 3.46 ± 0.57 mm in the normal group, 4.97 ± 0.75 mm in the CCS group, which thus had a significantly higher CPT (P < .01) than did the normal group. For the prognostic value of the CPT as a predictor of CCS, ROC analysis indicated that the best cutoff score for the CPT was 4.18 mm, with 93.9% sensitivity, 92.9% specificity, and AUC 0.97. Greater CPT was highly associated with a possibility of CCS. This conclusion will be helpful for assessing the CCS patients.

Volumetric Changes in Cervical Disc Herniation: Comparison of Cervical Expansive Open-door Laminoplasty and Cervical Microendoscopic Laminoplasty

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective study on 185 patients with 490 cervical disc herniation (CDH).

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to compare the changes in volumes of CDH in patients with degenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM) surgically treated by expansive open-door laminoplasty (EOLP) or cervical microendoscopic laminoplasty (CMEL).

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Spontaneous resorption of CDH was shown in patients with DCM after conservation treatment, but very few in surgically treated patients. Our previous study identified the clinical efficiency of CMEL to treat DCM but how CDH sized postoperatively, as well as comparing to EOLP, was unknown.

METHODS

Consecutive patients with DCM from December 2015 to December 2019, who underwent MRI evaluation, receiving CMEL or EOLP, and repeat MRI in follow-up were included. The volume of CDH were monitored using the picture archiving and communication system, further calculating the incidence of CDH with volume regression and the percentage changes of CDH volume. The correlations of possible determines with CDH volume changes were analyzed by Spearman rank correlation coefficient.

RESULTS

A total of 89 patients (215 CDHs, EOLP-group) and 96 patients (275 CDHs, CMEL-group) was surveyed, respectively. Resultantly, volume of CDH was decreased postoperatively in both EOLP and CMEL cases. But this CDH volume regression was more profound in CMEL groups (incidence of 81.2% from 223/275, median volume change ratio of -26.7%, occurring from 1 month after CMEL), statistically different from EOLP group (50.2% from 108/215, median volume change ratio of -5.4%, none-appearance within 1 month). Patients information as sex, age, and follow-up time, not CDH significant, was significantly correlated with CDH volume changes.

CONCLUSION

Patients who underwent CMEL developed a postoperative reduction of CDH volume, with more popularity, greater degree and earlier-staged than EOLP-patients. Young females with longer follow-up time were more likely occur.Level of Evidence: 4.