DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.18203/2349-2902.isj20190518

Retrospective and prospective analysis of clinical, radiological and prognostic factors affecting surgical denouement in ossified posterior longitudinal ligament: an institutional experience

Rajesh R. Raykar, Guruprasad Bettaswamy, Rajesh Kumar Singh, Mahendra M.

Abstract


Background: The most common cause of radiculopathy or myelopathy is “ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament (OPLL)”. Surgical management consists of various anterior and posterior procedures. Anterior procedures done are corpectomy and fusion. Posterior procedures include laminectomy and laminectomy with fusion that include the use of lateral mass or pedicle screws with rods. Objective was to study the clinical course and to delineate clinico-radiological prognostic factors with regard to surgical outcome.

Methods: Patients operated for cervical OPLL were included. Detailed clinical history and radiological findings were retrospectively taken from the case records of the patients and prospectively recorded in the cases operated till May 2018. A minimum follow-up of 6 months was done for improvement. Preoperative clinical evaluation was done. Surgical options were individualized for each patient. Detailed clinical evaluation was done at discharge and at follow-up.

Results: It has been found that those patients who were admitted with Nurick’s myelopathy grade IV and V at admission, those with higher number of levels involved like 5, 6 and 7, those with duration of symptoms of more than one year were more likely to have same or deteriorated outcome compared to their counterparts. Other parameters were not found to be significantly associated with outcome.

Conclusions: Duration of symptoms >12 months, Sphincter disturbances were significant poor clinical prognostic markers. Significant poor radiological prognostic markers were segmental stenotic index <0.4, MRI T2-Weighted hyper intense signal change.


Keywords


OPLL, Prognostic factors, Retrospective study, Surgical outcome

Full Text:

PDF

References


Choi BW, Song KJ, Chang H. Ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament: a review of literature. Asian Spine J. 2011;5(4):267-76.

Zhu B, Xu Y, Liu X, Liu Z, Dang G. Anterior approach versus posterior approach for the treatment of multilevel cervical spondylotic myelopathy: a systemic review and meta-analysis. Eur Spine J. 2013;22:1583-93.

Matsunaga S, Kukita M, Hayashi K, Shinkura R, Koriyama C, Sakou T, et al. Pathogenesis of myelopathy in patients with ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament. J Neurosurg: Spine. 2002 Mar;96(2):168-72.

Ogawa Y, Toyama Y, Chiba K, Matsumoto M, Nakamura M, Takaishi H, et al. Long-term results of expansive open-door laminoplasty for ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament of the cervical spine. J Neurosurg: Spine. 2004 Sep;1(2):168-74.

Wu JC, Liu L, Chen YC, Huang WC, Chen TJ, Cheng H. Ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament in the cervical spine: an 11-year comprehensive national epidemiology study. Neurosurgical Focus. 2011 Mar;30(3):E5.

Epstein NE. Ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament: diagnosis and surgical management. Neurosurg Quart. 1992;2:223-41.

Epstein NE. Ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament in evolution in 12 patients. Spine. 1994;19:673-81.

Sodeyama T, Goto S, Mochizuki M, Takahashi J, Moriya H. Effect of decompression enlargement laminoplasty for posterior shifting of the spinal cord. Spine. 1999;24:1527-32.

Jayakumar PN, Kolluri VS, Vasudev MK, Srikanth SG. Ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament of the cervical spine in Asian Indians-a multiracial comparison. Clin Neurol Neurosurg. 1996 May 1;98(2):142-8.

Ono K, Ota H, Tada K, Hamada H, Takaoka K. Ossified posterior longitudinal ligament. Spine. 1977;2:126-9.

Houten JK, Cooper PR. Laminectomy and posterior cervical plating for multilevel cervical spondylotic myelopathy and ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament: effects on cervical alignment, spinal cord compression, and neurological outcome. Neurosurg. 2003;52(5):1081-8.

Matsunaga S, Sakou T, Taketomi E, Komiya S. Clinical course of patients with ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament: a minimum 10-year cohort study. J Neurosurg: Spine. 2004 Mar;100(3):245-8.

Hirabayashi K, Watanabe K, Wakano K, Suzuki N, Satomi K, Ishii Y. Expansive open-door laminoplasty for cervical spinal stenotic myelopathy. Spine. 1983 Oct;8(7):693-9.

Epstein N. The surgical management of ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament in 51 patients. J Spinal Disord. 1993;6:432-54.

Yonenobu K, Hosono N, Iwasaki M, Asano M, Ono K. Laminoplasty versus subtotal corpectomy. A comparative study of results in multisegmental cervical spondylotic myelopathy. Spine. 1992 Nov;17(11):1281-4.

Epstein NE. 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;55:313-24.

Vitardo E, Levi AD. Management of Ossification of Posterior Longitudinal Ligament-Cervical Laminoplasty: Open Door. In: Benzel EC, editor. Spine Surgery. Philadelphia: Elsevier Churchill Livingstone; 2004:2103-2112.

Hirabayashi K, Miyakawa J, Satomi K, Maruyama T, Wakano K. Operative results and post-operative progression of ossification among patients with ossification of cervical posterior longitudinal ligament. Spine 1981;6(4):354-64.

Lee TT, Manzano GR, Green BA. Modified open-door cervical expansive laminoplasty for spondylotic myelopathy: operative technique, outcome and predictors of gait improvement. J Neurosurg. 1997;86:64-8.

Koyanagi I, Iwasaki Y, Hida K, Imamura H, Abe H. Magnetic resonance imaging findings in ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament of the cervical spine. J Neurosurg. 1998 Feb;88(2):247-54.