A Comparison of Clinical and Functional Outcomes Following Anterior, Posterior, and Combined Approaches for the Management of Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy
- PMID: 31303664
- PMCID: PMC6590014
- DOI: 10.4103/ortho.IJOrtho_8_16
A Comparison of Clinical and Functional Outcomes Following Anterior, Posterior, and Combined Approaches for the Management of Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy
Abstract
Background: The key determinants when planning surgery in patients with CSM are the direction of compression, number of levels, sagittal alignment and instability. However there is no literature that compares the clinical and functional outcomes following different approaches in patients selected for surgery.
Aims: Prospective non-randomized study that aims to compare the clinical and functional outcomes following surgical approaches with the goal of planning the optimal surgical strategy.
Material and methods: 75 patients- 61 males and 14 females (mean age: 64.2 years) with CSM underwent spinal decompression using an anterior (30), posterior (35) or combined approach (10).The surgical approach was selected based on the above mentioned key determinants. Functional disability was measured using the modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association score for myelopathy. Based on this the recovery rate was calculated. The mean followup duration was 21 months (range 6-72 months).
Results: The preoperative mJOA score was 11.01 and the functional disability was graded as mild in 15, moderate in 50 and severe in 10. Postoperatively, the mJOA score improved to 16.41.The overall recovery rate was 77.25%.Patients with mild deficits/disability preoperatively had a significantly better recovery (<0.01) than those with more severe disability. There was comparable improvement in the functional status within the groups with the recovery rates were 83.37%, 76.6% and 64.13%.The blood loss, operative time and peri-operative complication rate were significantly higher with a combined surgery (33%) as compared to anterior (13.3%) or posterior approaches 14.8%.
Conclusions: Outcomes are excellent following surgery for CSM.The best recovery is seen in patients with mild to moderate functional disability at the time of surgery.
Keywords: Cervical spondylotic myelopathy; functional outcomes; surgical approach.
Conflict of interest statement
There are no conflicts of interest.
Figures




Similar articles
-
Efficacy and safety of surgical decompression in patients with cervical spondylotic myelopathy: results of the AOSpine North America prospective multi-center study.J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2013 Sep 18;95(18):1651-8. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.L.00589. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2013. PMID: 24048552
-
Anterior cervical corpectomy for cervical spondylotic myelopathy: experience and surgical results in a series of 70 consecutive patients.J Clin Neurosci. 2006 Feb;13(2):233-8. doi: 10.1016/j.jocn.2005.04.011. J Clin Neurosci. 2006. PMID: 16503487
-
Metabolite and functional profile of patients with cervical spondylotic myelopathy.J Neurosurg Spine. 2017 May;26(5):547-553. doi: 10.3171/2016.9.SPINE151507. Epub 2017 Feb 3. J Neurosurg Spine. 2017. PMID: 28156205
-
Comparison of anterior decompression with fusion and posterior decompression with fusion for cervical spondylotic myelopathy-A systematic review and meta-analysis.J Orthop Sci. 2020 Nov;25(6):938-945. doi: 10.1016/j.jos.2019.12.010. Epub 2020 Jan 31. J Orthop Sci. 2020. PMID: 32008876
-
Ancillary outcome measures for assessment of individuals with cervical spondylotic myelopathy.Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2013 Oct 15;38(22 Suppl 1):S111-22. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e3182a7f499. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2013. PMID: 23963009 Review.
Cited by
-
Are There Advantages in Cervical Intrafacetal Fusion With Minimal Posterolateral Fusion (PLF) Compared to Conventional PLF in Posterior Cervical Fusion?Neurospine. 2024 Jun;21(2):525-535. doi: 10.14245/ns.2347132.566. Epub 2024 Feb 1. Neurospine. 2024. PMID: 38317549 Free PMC article.
-
Effect of Ventral vs Dorsal Spinal Surgery on Patient-Reported Physical Functioning in Patients With Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy: A Randomized Clinical Trial.JAMA. 2021 Mar 9;325(10):942-951. doi: 10.1001/jama.2021.1233. JAMA. 2021. PMID: 33687463 Free PMC article. Clinical Trial.
-
Percutaneous Fully-endoscopic Anterior Transcorporeal Procedure for the Treatment of Isolated Ossification of the Posterior Longitudinal Ligament in the Cervical Spine: A Case Report.Orthop Surg. 2024 Feb;16(2):514-520. doi: 10.1111/os.13966. Epub 2023 Dec 18. Orthop Surg. 2024. PMID: 38111022 Free PMC article.
-
Pathophysiological Changes and the Role of Notch-1 Activation After Decompression in a Compressive Spinal Cord Injury Rat Model.Front Neurosci. 2021 Jan 28;15:579431. doi: 10.3389/fnins.2021.579431. eCollection 2021. Front Neurosci. 2021. PMID: 33584186 Free PMC article.
-
Case Report: Concurrent esophageal and spinal cord compression in cervical spondylosis: integrated anterior osteophytectomy and zero-profile ACDF for dual pathology decompression.Front Surg. 2025 Jun 26;12:1609708. doi: 10.3389/fsurg.2025.1609708. eCollection 2025. Front Surg. 2025. PMID: 40642452 Free PMC article.
References
-
- Singh A, Tetreault L, Casey A, Laing R, Statham P, Fehlings MG. A summary of assessment tools for patients suffering from cervical spondylotic myelopathy: A systematic review on validity, reliability and responsiveness. Eur Spine J. 2015;24(Suppl 2):209–28. - PubMed
-
- Edwards CC, 2nd, Riew KD, Anderson PA, Hilibrand AS, Vaccaro AF. Cervical myelopathy. Current diagnostic and treatment strategies. Spine J. 2003;3:68–81. - PubMed
-
- Clarke E, Robinson PK. Cervical myelopathy: A complication of cervical spondylosis. Brain. 1956;79:483–510. - PubMed
-
- Komotar RJ, Mocco J, Kaiser MG. Surgical management of cervical myelopathy: Indications and techniques for laminectomy and fusion. Spine J. 2006;6:252S–67S. - PubMed
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources