Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
European Spine Journal
Published in: European Spine Journal 8/2015

Open Access 01-08-2015 | Original Article

The relationship between laminoplasty opening angle and increased sagittal canal diameter and the prediction of spinal canal expansion following double-door cervical laminoplasty

Authors: Zhen-fang Gu, Ai-li Zhang, Yong Shen, Wen-yuan Ding, Feng Li, Xian-ze Sun

Published in: European Spine Journal | Issue 8/2015

Login to get access

Abstract

Purpose

To clarify the relationship between laminoplasty opening angle (LOA) and the increase in sagittal canal diameter (SCD) in double-door cervical laminoplasty (DDCL) and to predict the increase in SCD using the resulting formula.

Methods

We analyzed 20 patients with multilevel cervical spondylotic myelopathy who underwent DDCL between September 2010 and January 2013. The pre- and post-operative parameters of the cervical spinal canal were measured by computed tomography. We deduced a formula describing the relationship between LOA and the increase in SCD and used it to predict the increase in SCD of these patients as LOA increased.

Results

When the C3–C7 LOA was 25°–45°, the magnitude of the increase in SCD was notable (increases of 3.08–5.6 mm compared with the pre-operative SCD). When the C3–C7 LOA was more than 45°, the magnitude of the increase in SCD was relatively smaller; the increase in C3–C7 SCD with a 55° LOA was merely 0.4 mm more than with a 45° LOA. When LOA was 30° at C3–C6 or 40° at C7, the increase in SCD was more than 4 mm. When the C3–C6 LOA was 40°, SCD increased by more than 5 mm.

Conclusions

The formula accurately showed the relationship between LOA and the increase in SCD in DDCL. Based on the LOA, increases in SCD following C3–C7 laminoplasty can be accurately predicted using this formula. This enables DDCL based on accurate individual LOAs, which prevents inadequate or excessive opening.
Literature
1.
Kurokawa T, Tsuyama N, Tanaka H et al (1984) Enlargement of spinal canal by sagittal splitting of the spinal processes (in Japanese). Bessatsu Seikei Geka 2:234–240
2.
Kurokawa T, Nakamura K, Machida H (1986) Cervical canal enlargement by split spinous process method (in Japanese). Bessatsu Seikei Geka 9:30–32
3.
Kawai S, Sunaga K, Doi K, Saika M, Taguchi T (1988) Cervical laminoplasty (Hattrori’s method): procedure and follow-up results. Spine 13:1245–1250PubMedCrossRef
4.
Yue WM, Tan CT, Tan SB, Tan SK, Tay BK (2000) Results of cervical laminoplasty and a comparison between single and double trap-door techniques. J Spinal Disord 13(4):329–335PubMedCrossRef
5.
Seichi A, Takeshita K, Ohishi I et al (2001) Long-term results of doubledoor laminoplasty for cervical stenotic myelopathy. Spine 26(5):479–487PubMedCrossRef
6.
Yukawa Y, Kato F, Ito K et al (2007) Laminoplasty and skip laminectomy for cervical compressive myelopathy: range of motion, postoperative neck pain, and surgical outcomes in a randomized prospective study. Spine 32(18):1980–1985PubMedCrossRef
7.
8.
9.
10.
Nakano K, Harata S, Suetsuna F, Araki T, Itoh J (1992) Spinous process-splitting laminoplasty using hydroxyapatite spinous process spacer. Spine 17(suppl3):41–43CrossRef
11.
Tomita K, Kawahara N, Toribatake Y, Heller JG (1998) Expansive midline T-saw laminoplasty (modified spinous process-splitting) for the management of cervical myelopathy. Spine 23(1):32–37PubMedCrossRef
12.
13.
Tsuzuki N, Zhogshi L, Abe R, Saiki K (1993) Paralysis of the arm after posterior decompression of the spinal cord: 1. Anatomical investigation of the mechanism of paralysis: analysis of clinical findings. Eur Spine J 2(4):191–196PubMedCrossRef
14.
Uematsu Y, Tokuhashi Y, Matsuzaki H (1998) Radiculopathy after laminoplasty of the cervical spine. Spine 23(19):2057–2062PubMedCrossRef
15.
Hatta Y, Shiraishi T, Hase H et al (2005) Is posterior spinal cord shifting by extensive posterior decompression clinically significant for multisegmental cervical spondylotic myelopathy? Spine 30(21):2414–2419PubMedCrossRef
16.
Tsuzuki N, Abe R, Saiki K, Zhongshi L (1996) Extradural tethering effect as one mechanism of radiculopathy complicating posterior decompression of the cervical spinal cord. Spine 21(2):203–211PubMedCrossRef
17.
Dai L, Ni B, Yuan W, Jia L (1998) Radiculopathy after laminectomy for cervical compression myelopathy. J Bone Joint Surg Br 80(5):846–849PubMedCrossRef
18.
Wang XY, Dai LY, Xu HZ, Chi YL (2006) Prediction of spinal canal expansion following cervical laminoplasty: a computer-simulated comparison between single and double-door techniques. Spine 31(24):2863–2870PubMedCrossRef
19.
Itoh T, Tsuji H (1985) Technical improvements and results of laminoplasty for compressive myelopathy in the cervical spine. Spine 10(8):729–736PubMedCrossRef
20.
Hirabayashi K, Watanabe K, Wakano K, Suzuki N, Satomi K, Ishii Y (1983) Expansive open-door laminoplasty for cervical spinal stenotic myelopathy. Spine 8(7):693–699PubMedCrossRef
21.
Kohno K, Kumon Y, Oka Y, Matsui S, Ohue S, Sakaki S (1997) Evaluation of prognostic factors following expansive laminoplasty for cervical spinal stenotic myelopathy. Surg Neurol 48(3):237–245PubMedCrossRef
22.
Hamburger C, Buttner A, Uhl E (1997) The cross-sectional area of the cervical spinal canal in patients with cervical spondylotic myelopathy: correlation of preoperative and postoperative area with clinical symptoms. Spine 22(17):1990–1994 (discussion 1995)PubMedCrossRef
23.
Aita I, Hayashi K, Wadano Y, Yabuki T (1998) Posterior movement and enlargement of the spinal cord after cervical laminoplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Br 80(1):33–37PubMedCrossRef
24.
Patel CK, Cunningham BJ, Herkowitz HN (2002) Techniques in cervical laminoplasty. Spine J 2(6):450–455PubMedCrossRef
25.
Martin-Benlloch JA, Maruenda-Paulino JI, Barra-Pla A, Laguia-Garzaran M (2003) Expansive laminoplasty as a method for managing cervical multilevel spondylotic myelopathy. Spine 28(7):680–684PubMed
26.
Kimura S, Gomibuchi F, Shimoda H et al (2000) Boomerang deformity of cervical spinal cord migrating between split laminae after laminoplasty. Eur Spine J 9(2):144–151PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
Metadata
Title
The relationship between laminoplasty opening angle and increased sagittal canal diameter and the prediction of spinal canal expansion following double-door cervical laminoplasty
Authors
Zhen-fang Gu
Ai-li Zhang
Yong Shen
Wen-yuan Ding
Feng Li
Xian-ze Sun
Publication date
01-08-2015
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in
European Spine Journal / Issue 8/2015
Print ISSN: 0940-6719
Electronic ISSN: 1432-0932
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-014-3387-7

Other articles of this Issue 8/2015

European Spine Journal 8/2015 Go to the issue

Original Article

Implications of different patterns of “double-layer sign” in cervical ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament

Original Article

Safety of percutaneous vertebroplasty for the treatment of metastatic spinal tumors in patients with posterior wall defects

Abstracts

CSRS-Europe annual meeting, London 2015: oral podium abstract collection

Review

Therapeutic radiotherapy for giant cell tumor of the spine: a systemic review

Original Article

Surgery for plasma cell neoplasia patients with spinal instability or neurological impairment caused by spinal lesions as the first clinical manifestation

Letter to the Editor

Letter to the Editor concerning “High-heeled-related alterations in the static sagittal profile of the spino-pelvic structure in young women” by Min Dai et al. [Eur Spine J (2015); DOI 10.1007/s00586-015-3857-6]