Outcome of Anterior and Posterior Endoscopic Procedures for Cervical Radiculopathy Due to Degenerative Disk Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Endoscopic Posterior Approach for Cervical Myelopathy and Radiculopathy Using Tubular Retractor: Our Experience, Surgical Technique, and Literature Review

BACKGROUND

Endoscopic posterior approach can effectively decompress cervical root and cord secondary to posterior compression. We present our experience in 229 patients using tubular retractor, and the relevant literature is reviewed.

METHODS

Retrospective analysis of multilevel myelopathy and or radiculopathy was performed. Indications for posterior approach was primary posterior compressions at cord and or root. Combined compression from posterior side and mild to moderate anterior pressure with acceptable lordosis were also decompressed. Bilateral cord decompression and foraminotomy for radiculopathy was performed using tubular retractor.

RESULT

Myelopathy and radiculopathy were present in 220 and 9 patients, respectively. A total of 53 foraminotomy procedures were performed in 36 patients. All patients showed improvement, with the mean preoperative Nurick grade decreasing from 2.72 ± 0.799 to 0.78 ± 0.911 after surgery. There was significant improvement in postoperative Nurick grades compared with preoperative grades (Z-value = 13.306, P < 0.0001). Operative results were better in patients with good preoperative Nurick grades (grades 1 and 2) compared with those with poorer grades (grades 3 and 4). Minor bleeding, small dural tear, and root injury were observed in 42, 4, and 8 patients, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Endoscopic approach was effective and safe for root and cord decompression. This study was limited by its single-center, retrospective design, exclusion of some eligible patients, a short postoperative Nurick grade assessment period of 6 months, and absence of a comprehensive long-term postoperative biomechanical assessment. To validate these results, a prospective multicenter study addressing these limitations is needed.

Surgeon reported practice patterns related to full endoscopic cervical decompression procedures

BACKGROUND

The microsurgical anterior approach to the cervical spine is commonplace. Fewer surgeons perform posterior cervical microsurgical procedures on a routine basis for lack of indication, more bleeding, persistent postoperative neck pain, and risk of progressive misalignment. In comparison, the endoscopic technique is preferentially performed through the posterior approach. Many spine surgeons and even surgeons versed in lumbar endoscopy are often reluctant to consider endoscopic procedures in the cervical spine. We report the results of a surgeon survey to find out why.

METHODS

A questionnaire of 10 questions was sent to spine surgeons by email and chat groups in social media networks including Facebook, WeChat, WhatsApp, and LinkedIn to collect practice pattern data about microscopic and endoscopic spine surgery in the lumbar and cervical spine. The responses were cross-tabulated by surgeons' demographic data. Pearson Chi-Square measures, Kappa statistics, and linear regression analysis of agreement or disagreement were performed by analyzing the distribution of variances using the statistical package SPSS Version 27.0.

RESULTS

The survey response rate was 39.7%, with 50 of the 126 surgeons who started the survey submitting a completed questionnaire. Of the 50 surgeons, 56.2% were orthopedic, and 42% neurological surgeons. Most surgeons worked in private practice (42%). Another 26% were university-employed, 18% were in private practice affiliated with a university, and the remaining 14% were hospital employed. The majority of surgeons (55.1%) were autodidacts. The largest responding surgeon groups were between 35-44 years (38%) and between 45-54 years of age (34%). Half of the responding surgeons were routinely performing endoscopic cervical spine surgery. The other half did not perform it for the main hurdle of fear of complications (50%). Lack of appropriate mentorship was listed as second most reason (25.4%). More concerns for not performing cervical endoscopic approaches were the perception of lack of technology (20.8%) and suitable surgical indication (12.5%). Only 4.2% considered cervical endoscopy too risky. Nearly a third (30.6%) of the spine surgeons treated over 80% of their cervical spine patients with endoscopic surgeries. Most commonly performed were posterior endoscopic cervical discectomy (PECD; 52%), posterior endoscopic cervical foraminotomy (PECF; 48%), anterior endoscopic cervical discectomy (AECD; 32%), cervical endoscopic unilateral laminotomy for bilateral decompression (CE-ULBD; 30%), respectively.

CONCLUSION

Cervical endoscopic spine surgery is gaining traction among spine surgeons. However, by far most surgeons performing cervical endoscopic spine surgery work in private practice and are autodidacts. This lack of a teacher to shorten the learning curve as well as fear of complications are two of the major impediments to the successful implementation of cervical endoscopic procedures.

Learning curve for biportal endoscopic posterior cervical foraminotomy determined using the cumulative summation test

BACKGROUND

Learning curves describe the rate of performance improvements corresponding to the surgeon's caseload, followed by a plateau where limited further improvements are observed. This study aimed to determine the learning curve for biportal full-endoscopic posterior cervical foraminotomy (BE-PCF) for the unilateral cervical foraminal disc.

METHODS

The learning curve was evaluated using a learning curve cumulative summation test (LC-CUSUM). The goal for the operation time was set to 78 min, which is the mean operation time (mOT) of percutaneous full-endoscopic posterior cervical foraminotomy (PE-PCF) performed by a senior surgeon. Moreover, clinical outcomes and post-operative complications were compared between the early and late learning periods 1 year post-operatively.

RESULTS

This study enrolled the first 50 patients who underwent single-level BE-PCF, performed by a single surgeon. The LC-CUSUM signalled competency for surgery at the 20th operation, indicating that sufficient evidence was obtained to prove that the surgeon was competent. The mOT was 71.29 ± 11.69 min in BE-PCF, 71.84 ± 12.61 min in the early learning period, and 67.83 ± 10.31 min in the late learning period (p = 0.254). There was no statistical difference in clinical outcomes, visual analogue scale scores, and neck disability index between both periods (p > 0.05). Four complications were recorded throughout the whole period, with three in the early period and one in the late period (p = 0.285).

CONCLUSION

Our study shows that BE-PCF has a learning curve of 20 caseloads to achieve 90% proficiency, and it significantly reduces the operation time based on the performance of a senior surgeon proficient in PE-PCF.