Correlation of imaging characteristics of degenerative cervical myelopathy and the surgical approach with improvement for postoperative neck pain and neural function: a retrospective cohort study.

Background: Complex degenerative cervical spondylotic myelopathy (DCM) is characterized by a variety of complex imaging features. The surgical method for DCM remains controversial. This study aimed to examine the correlation between the imaging characteristics of DCM with varying degrees of complexity and the surgical approach and clinical outcome. Methods: A retrospective cohort study involving retrospective data collection was performed. A total of 139 patients with DCM who underwent surgery between January 2015 and January 2018 in the Orthopedics Department of Shanxi Bethune Hospital were divided into 3 groups according to the complexity of imaging features: 18 patients in the mild group, 66 patients in the moderate group, and 55 patients in the severe group. The Visual Analog Scale (VAS) and Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) scores were used to compare the effects of neck pain and neural function prior to surgery according to the rate of improvement as of the last follow-up. Routine X-ray films were obtained at the follow-up of 3-6 months. The necessity of computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) examinations was determined based on clinical findings and X-ray images. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to compare groups, the least significant difference (LSD) test was used for multiple comparisons, and the Chi-square test was used to compare classification indicators (imaging manifestations, gender), with P<0.05 being statistically significant. Binary logistic regression analysis was performed to determine the primary influencing factors of the JOA recovery rate. Results: In all three groups, JOA and VAS scores at the final follow-up were significantly higher than those before surgery (P<0.001). There were significant differences in the preoperative VAS and JOA scores between any two groups, as well as in the VAS and JOA scores and improvement rates at the last follow-up between the mild group and the moderate group and between the mild group and the severe group (P<0.001). Age, preoperative JOA scores, MRI intramedullary hyperintensity signal, and the degree of spinal cord compression were primarily related to the nervous system recovery rate (P<0.001). Conclusions: Age, MRI intramedullary hyperintensity signal, degree of spinal cord compression, and other variables were associated with the improvement of neural function in patients with DCM. Therefore, in addition to the JOA improvement rate or VAS score, additional factors, such as the patient's condition, the improvement in quality of life, and the patient's financial capacity, should be considered in evaluating the improvement of postoperative neck pain and neural function.

Biomechanical evaluation of Percutaneous endoscopic posterior lumbar interbody fusion and minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion: a biomechanical analysis.

In order to analyze and evaluate the stability of lumbar spine and the risk of cage subsidence after different minimally invasive fusion operations, two finite element models Percutaneous endoscopic posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PE-PLIF) and minimally invasive transforaminal lumbar interbody Fusion (MIS-TLIF) were established. The results showed that compared with MIS-TLIF, PE-PLIF had better segmental stability, lower pedicle screw rod system stress, and lower risk of cage subsidence. The results suggest that the cage with appropriate height should be selected to ensure the segmental stability and avoid the risk of the subsidence caused by the cage with large height.

Percutaneous Endoscopic Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion with Unilateral Laminotomy for Bilateral Decompression Vs. Open Posterior Lumbar Interbody Fusion for the Treatment of Lumbar Spondylolisthesis.

Background: Endoscopic lumbar interbody fusion is a new technology that is mostly used for single-segment and unilateral lumbar spine surgery. The purpose of this study is to introduce percutaneous endoscopic posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PE-PLIF) with unilateral laminotomy for bilateral decompression (ULBD) for lumbar spondylolisthesis and evaluate the efficacy by comparing it with open posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF). Methods: Twenty-eight patients were enrolled in PE-PLIF with the ULBD group and the open PLIF group. The perioperative data of the two groups were compared to evaluate the safety of PE-PLIF with ULBD. The visual analog scale (VAS) back pain, VAS leg pain, and Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) scores of the two groups preoperatively and postoperatively were compared to evaluate clinical efficacy. Preoperative and postoperative imaging data were collected to evaluate the effectiveness of the operation. Results: No differences in baseline data were found between the two groups (p > 0.05). The operation time in PE-PLIF with the ULBD group (221.2 ± 32.9 min) was significantly longer than that in the PLIF group (138.4 ± 25.7 min) (p < 0.05), and the estimated blood loss and postoperative hospitalization were lower than those of the PLIF group (p < 0.05). The postoperative VAS and ODI scores were significantly improved in both groups (p < 0.05), but the postoperative VAS back pain score in the PE-PLIF group was significantly lower than that in the PLIF group (p < 0.05). The excellent and good rates in both groups were 96.4% according to MacNab's criteria. The disc height and cross-sectional area of the spinal canal were significantly improved in the two groups after surgery (p < 0.05), with no difference between the groups (p > 0.05). The fusion rates in PE-PLIF with the ULBD group and the PLIF group were 89.3% and 92.9% (p > 0.05), respectively, the cage subsidence rates were 14.3% and 17.9% (p > 0.05), respectively, and the lumbar spondylolisthesis reduction rates were 92.72 ± 6.39% and 93.54 ± 5.21%, respectively (p > 0.05). Conclusion: The results from this study indicate that ULBD can be successfully performed during PE-PLIF, and the combined procedure is a safe and reliable treatment method for lumbar spondylolisthesis.