Surgical Strategy for Ossification of the Posterior Longitudinal Ligament in the Cervical Spine
Abstract
Ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament is a common cause of cervical myelopathy, and controversy remains regarding surgical options. Between January 2004 and December 2007, a total of 164 patients with ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament in the cervical spine who underwent surgical treatment at the authors’ institution were included in this study. The choice of surgical option was based on pathological extent and cervical alignment. Short-segment pathology was treated via the anterior approach and long-segment pathology via the posterior approach. When the posterior approach was selected, laminoplasty was performed for the patients with cervical lordosis and laminectomy with fusion for those with cervical kyphosis. Consequently, anterior corpectomy and fusion was performed in 91 patients, laminoplasty in 41 patients, and laminectomy and instrumented fusion in 32 patients. The Japanese Orthopedic Association scoring system was used to evaluate patients’ neurological status, and related complications were also recorded. Clinical results between different approaches and techniques were compared at mid-term follow-up.
Based on the results of this study and a review of previous literature, no significant differences existed between different approaches and techniques for patients with mild ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament, but anterior corpectomy and fusion had significantly better results in patients with severe ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament. With respect to the posterior approach, laminectomy and instrumented fusion improved the surgical results of patients with cervical kyphosis, but a high incidence of C5 palsy existed simultaneously.
- 1.Tani T, Ushida T, Ishida K, Iai H, Noguchi T, Yamamoto H. Relative safety of anterior microsurgical decompression versus laminoplasty for cervical myelopathy with a massive ossified posterior longitudinal ligament. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2002; 27(22):2491–2498.
10.1097/00007632-200211150-00013 Crossref Medline, Google Scholar - 2.Jain SK, Salunke PS, Vyas KH, Behari SS, Banerji D, Jain VK. Multisegmental cervical ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament: anterior vs posterior approach. Neurol India. 2005; 53(3):283–285.
10.4103/0028-3886.16923 Crossref Medline, Google Scholar - 3.Masaki Y, Yamazaki M, Okawa A, An analysis of factors causing poor surgical outcome in patients with cervical myelopathy due to ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament: anterior decompression with spinal fusion versus laminoplasty. J Spinal Disord Tech. 2007; 20(1):7–13.
10.1097/01.bsd.0000211260.28497.35 Crossref Medline, Google Scholar - 4.Iwasaki M, Okuda S, Miyauchi A, Surgical strategy for cervical myelopathy due to ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament: Part 2: Advantages of anterior decompression and fusion over laminoplasty. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2007; 32(6): 654–660.
10.1097/01.brs.0000257566.91177.cb Crossref Medline, Google Scholar - 5.Sakai K, Okawa A, Takahashi M, Five-year follow-up evaluation of surgical treatment for cervical myelopathy caused by ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament: a prospective comparative study of anterior decompression and fusion with floating method versus laminoplasty. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2012; 37(5):367–376.
10.1097/BRS.0b013e31821f4a51 Crossref Medline, Google Scholar - 6.Tsukimoto H. A case report: autopsy of syndrome of compression of spinal cord owing to ossfication within spinal canal of cervical spines [in Japanese]. Nippon Geka Hokan (Kyoto) (Arch Jpn Chir). 1960; 29:1003–1007. Google Scholar
- 7.Epstein N. Anterior approaches to cervical spondylosis and ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament: review of operative technique and assessment of 65 multilevel circumferential procedures. Surg Neurol. 2001; 55(6):313–324.
10.1016/S0090-3019(01)00464-5 Crossref Medline, Google Scholar - 8.Mizuno J, Nakagawa H. Ossified posterior longitudinal ligament: management strategies and outcomes. Spine J. 2006; 6(6 Suppl):282S–288S.
10.1016/j.spinee.2006.05.009 Crossref Medline, Google Scholar - 9.Yamazaki A, Homma T, Uchiyama S, Katsumi Y, Okumura H. Morphologic limitations of posterior decompression by midsagittal splitting method for myelopathy caused by ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament in the cervical spine. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1999; 24(1):32–34.
10.1097/00007632-199901010-00008 Crossref Medline, Google Scholar - 10.Joseph V, Kumar G S,, Rajshekhar V. Cerebrospinal fluid leak during cervical corpectomy for ossified posterior longitudinal ligament: incidence, management, and outcome. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2009; 34(5):491–494.
10.1097/BRS.0b013e318195d245 Crossref Medline, Google Scholar - 11.Hida K, Iwasaki Y, Koyanagi I, Abe H. Bone widow computed tomography for detection of dural defect associated with cervical ossified posterior longitudinal ligament. Neurol Med Chir (Tokyo). 1997; 37(2):173–175; discussion 175–176.
10.2176/nmc.37.173 Crossref Medline, Google Scholar - 12.Mizuno J, Nakagawa H, Song J, Matsuo N. Surgery for dural ossification in associated with cervical ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament via an anterior approach. Neurol India. 2005; 53(3):354–357.
10.4103/0028-3886.16944 Crossref Medline, Google Scholar - 13.Chen Y, Guo Y, Chen D, Lu X, Wang X, Tian H, Yuan W. Diagnosis and surgery of ossification of posterior longitudinal ligament associated with dural ossification in the cervical spine. Eur Spine J. 2009; 18(10):1541–1547.
10.1007/s00586-009-1029-2 Crossref Medline, Google Scholar - 14.Sakaura H, Hosono N, Mukai Y, Ishii T, Yoshikawa H. C5 palsy after decompression surgery for cervical myelopathy: review of the literature. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2003; 28(21):2447–2451.
10.1097/01.BRS.0000090833.96168.3F Crossref Medline, Google Scholar - 15.Chen Y, Chen D, Wang X, Guo Y, He Z. C5 palsy after laminectomy and posterior cervical fixation for ossification of posterior longitudinal ligament. J Spinal Disord Tech. 2007; 20(7):533–535.
10.1097/BSD.0b013e318042b655 Crossref Medline, Google Scholar
