Is Posterior Cervical Foraminotomy Better Than Fusion for Warfighters?: A Biomechanical Study.

INTRODUCTION: Cervical spondylosis in the warfighter is a common musculoskeletal problem and can be career-ending especially if it requires fusion. Head-mounted equipment and increased biomechanical forces on the cervical spine have resulted in accelerated cervical spine degeneration. Current surgical gold standard is anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF). Posterior cervical foraminotomy (PCF) is a nonfusion surgical alternative, and this can be effective in alleviating radiculopathy from foraminal stenosis caused by disc-osteophyte complex. Biomechanical studies have not been done to analyze motion associated with military aircrew personnel following PCF. The aim of this study was to compare the biomechanical responses of the effects of ACDF and PCF with different grades of facet resection under simulated military aircrew conditions using range of motion, disc pressure, and facet loads at the index and adjacent levels. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A validated 3D finite element model of the human cervical spinal column was used to simulate various graded PCF and ACDF. All surgical simulations were performed at the most commonly operated level (C5-C6) in warfighters. Pure moment loading under flexion, extension, and lateral bending, and in vivo follower force of 75 N were applied to the intact spine. Hybrid loading protocol was used to achieve 134 degrees of combined flexion-extension and 83 degrees of lateral bending in intact and surgical models to reflect military loading conditions. Segmental motions, disc pressure, and facet load were obtained and normalized with respect to the intact model to quantify the biomechanical effect. RESULTS: Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion decreased range of motion at the index and increased motion at the adjacent levels, while all graded PCF responses had an opposite trend: increased motion at the index and decreased motion at adjacent levels. The magnitude of changes depended on the level of resection, spinal level, and loading mode. Disc pressure increased at the index level and decreased at the adjacent levels after PCF. These changes were exaggerated with increasing extent of facet resection. Facet load increased at the index level after PCF especially with extension and right (contralateral) lateral bending. Complete facetectomy led to facet load increases greater than ACDF at the adjacent levels in both flexion and extension. CONCLUSIONS: Posterior cervical foraminotomy is a motion-preserving implant-free surgical alternative to ACDF for warfighters with cervical radiculopathy after failure of conservative management. The treating surgeon must pay close attention to the extent of facet resection to avoid potential spinal instability and future disc and facet degeneration after PCF. Posterior cervical foraminotomy can be more advantageous than ACDF in terms of adjacent segment degeneration, motion preservation, reoperation rate, surgical cost, and retention of warfighters.

Rapid qualitative analysis of recruitment obstacles in the FORVAD (Posterior Cervical Foraminotomy surgery versus Anterior Cervical Discectomy surgery in the treatment of cervical brachialgia) randomised, controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The number of surgical trials is increasing but such trials can be complex to deliver and pose specific challenges. A multi-centre, Phase III, RCT comparing Posterior Cervical Foraminotomy versus Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion in the Treatment of Cervical Brachialgia (FORVAD Trial) was unable to recruit to target. A rapid qualitative study was conducted during trial closedown to understand the experiences of healthcare professionals who participated in the FORVAD Trial, with the aim of informing future research in this area. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 18 healthcare professionals who had participated in the FORVAD Trial. Interviews explored participants' experiences of the FORVAD trial. A rapid qualitative analysis was conducted, informed by Normalisation Process Theory. RESULTS: Four main themes were generated in the data analysis: (1) individual vs. community equipoise; (2) trial set-up and delivery; (3) identifying and approaching patients; and (4) timing of randomisation. The objectives of the FORVAD trial made sense to participants and they supported the idea that there was clinical or collective equipoise regarding the two FORVAD interventions; however, many surgeons had treatment preferences and lacked individual equipoise. The site which had most recruitment success had adopted a more structured process for identification and recruitment of patients, whereas other sites that adopted more "ad hoc" screening strategies struggled to identify patients. Randomisation on the day of surgery caused both medico-legal and practical concerns at some sites. CONCLUSIONS: Organisation and implementation of a surgical trial in neurosurgery is complex and presents many challenges. Sites often reported low recruitment and discussed the logistical issues of conducting a complex surgical RCT. Future trials in neurosurgery may need to offer more flexibility and time during set-up to maximise opportunities for larger recruitment numbers. Rapid qualitative analysis informed by Normalisation Process Theory was able to quickly identify key issues with trial implementation so rapid qualitative analysis may be a useful approach for teams conducting qualitative research in trials. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN, ISRCTN reference: 10,133,661. Registered 23rd November 2018.

Minimally invasive posterior cervical foraminotomy vs. anterior cervical discectomy and fusion in the treatment of patients with single-level unilateral cervical radiculopathy.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to observe the clinical efficacy and safety of minimally invasive posterior cervical foraminotomy (MI-PCF) and anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) in the treatment of single-level unilateral cervical radiculopathy (SLUCR). PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed 81 patients with SLUCR in two hospitals from February 2020 to February 2022, including the MI-PCF group (n=40) and the ACDF group (n=41). The differences in neck and shoulder pain, visual analog score (VAS), upper limb radiating pain (VAS), and neck disability index (NDI) were compared. Operative time, intraoperative bleeding, hospital stay, and complications were also compared between the two groups. RESULTS: The degree of neck and shoulder pain relief at 1 day postoperatively was better in the ACDF group than in the MI-PCF group (p<0.05), while there were no significant differences between the two groups in terms of neck and shoulder pain relief at 1 month, 3 months, 6 months, and 12 months postoperatively, (p>0.05). There were no significant differences in the relief of upper limb radiating pain and the decrease of NDI scores between the two groups at 1 day, 1 month, 3 months, 6 months, and 12 months after surgery (p>0.05). The patients in MI-PCF group had shorter operative time, less bleeding, and shorter hospital stay, which were statistically different (p<0.05). There was no statistical difference in the complication rate between the two groups, (p>0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The clinical efficacy and safety of MI-PCF and ACDF in the treatment of SLUCR are satisfactory, meanwhile, MI-PCF has shorter operative time, less bleeding and shorter hospital stay than ACDF, which is worthy of clinical promotion.

The effect of large channel-based foraminoplasty on lumbar biomechanics in percutaneous endoscopic discectomy: a finite element analysis.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to evaluate the effect of foraminoplasty using large-channel endoscopy during TESSYS on the biomechanics of the lumbar spine. METHODS: A complete lumbar spine model, M1, was built using 3D finite elements, and models M2 and M3 were constructed to simulate the intraoperative removal of the superior articular process of L5 using a trephine saw with diameters of 5 mm and 8.5 mm, respectively, and applying normal physiological loads on the different models to simulate six working conditions-anterior flexion, posterior extension, left-right lateral bending, and left-right rotation-to investigate the displacement and facet joint stress change of the surgical segment, and the disc stress change of the surgical and adjacent segments. RESULTS: Compared with the M1 model, the M2 and M3 models showed decreased stress at the L4-5 left FJ and a significant increase in stress at the right FJ in forward flexion. In the M2 and M3 models, the L4-5 FJ stresses were significantly greater in left lateral bending or left rotation than in right lateral bending or right rotation. The right FJ stress in M3 was greater during left rotation than that in M2, and that in M2 was greater than that in M1. The L4-5disc stress in the M3 model was greater during posterior extension than that in the M1 and M2 models. The L4-5disc stress in the M3 model was greater in the right rotation than in the M2 model, and that in the M2 model was greater than that in the M1 model. CONCLUSION: Foraminoplasty using large-channel endoscopy could increase the stress on the FJ and disc of the surgical segment, which suggested unnecessary and excessive resection should be avoided in PTED to minimize biomechanical disruption.

Uniportal Full-endoscopic Foraminotomy for Lumbar Foraminal Stenosis: Clinical Characteristics and Functional Outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: Uniportal full-endoscopic foraminotomy offers a promising alternative to conventional surgical methods for individuals afflicted by lumbar foraminal stenosis. This study aims to evaluate the efficacy and clinical outcomes of uniportal full-endoscopic foraminotomy in patients diagnosed with lumbar foraminal stenosis. METHODS: A comprehensive retrospective analysis was conducted on individuals who underwent full-endoscopic foraminotomy in our medical center, between January 2018 and December 2019. The investigation encompassed the demographic data of patients and key clinical metrics such as the visual analogue scale of leg (VAS-L) and back pain (VAS-B), Oswestry disability index (ODI) scores, the Short Form-36 Health Survey physical component summary (SF-36 PCS) and the mental component summary (SF-36 MCS), as well as modified MacNab grades, were systematically assessed and compared. Furthermore, radiological parameters: Coronal Cobb angle (CCA), Intervertebral angle changes (IAC), Disc height index (DHI), the foraminal cross-sectional area (FCSA) and the FCSA enlargement ratio were also compared. A variety of statistical analyses including Student t-test, chi-square tests, Fisher's exact tests, Pearson's and Spearman's correlation analyses, and Interclass Correlation Coefficients (ICCs) were employed. RESULTS: 64 patients, including 34 males and 30 females were enrolled. The mean follow-up period extended to 22.66 ± 7.05 months. Distribution by affected segments revealed 26.6% at L4-5, 67.1% at L5-S1 level, and 6.25% at both L4-L5 and L5-S1 levels. At the final follow-up, VAS-L decreased from 7.26 ± 1.19 to 1.37 ± 1.25, while VAS-B decreased from 6.95 ± 0.54 to 1.62 ± 1.13 (p < 0.001). ODI score also demonstrated a substantial decrease from 74.73 ± 8.68 to 23.27 ± 8.71 (p < 0.001). Both SF-36 PCS and SF-36 MCS scores improved significantly (p < 0.001). Modified MacNab criteria revealed 58 excellent-good patients (90.7%), and 6 fair-poor patients (9.3%). No significant differences were founded in the CCA (p = 0.1065), IAC (p = 0.5544), and DHI (p = 0.1348) between pre-operation and the final follow-up. However, the FCSA significantly increased from 73.41 ± 11.75 to 173.40 ± 18.62 mm2 (p < 0.001), and the enlargement ratio was 142.9% ± 49.58%. Notably, the final follow-up FCSA and the FCSA enlargement ratio were found to be larger in the excellent and good group compared to the fair and poor group, according to the modified MacNab criteria. CONCLUSION: The utilization of uniportal full-endoscopic foraminotomy has demonstrated its safety and efficacy in addressing lumbar foraminal stenosis. The clinical success of this procedure appears to be closely associated with the radiological decompression of the intervertebral foramen area. Importantly, the application of this technology does not seem to compromise the overall stability of the lumbar region.

Cost-effectiveness of posterior versus anterior surgery for cervical radiculopathy: results from a multicentre randomised non-inferiority trial (FACET).

PURPOSE: For cervical nerve root compression, anterior cervical discectomy with fusion (anterior surgery) or posterior foraminotomy (posterior surgery) are safe and effective options. Posterior surgery might have a more beneficial economic profile compared to anterior surgery. The purpose of this study was to analyse if posterior surgery is cost-effective compared to anterior surgery. METHODS: An economic evaluation was performed as part of a multicentre, noninferiority randomised clinical trial (Foraminotomy ACDF Cost-effectiveness Trial) with a follow-up of 2 years. Primary outcomes were cost-effectiveness based on arm pain (Visual Analogue Scale (VAS; 0-100)) and cost-utility (quality adjusted life years (QALYs)). Missing values were estimated with multiple imputations and bootstrap simulations were used to obtain confidence intervals (CIs). RESULTS: In total, 265 patients were randomised and 243 included in the analyses. The pooled mean decrease in VAS arm at 2-year follow-up was 44.2 in the posterior and 40.0 in the anterior group (mean difference, 4.2; 95% CI, - 4.7 to 12.9). Pooled mean QALYs were 1.58 (posterior) and 1.56 (anterior) (mean difference, 0.02; 95% CI, - 0.05 to 0.08). Societal costs were €28,046 for posterior and €30,086 for the anterior group, with lower health care costs for posterior (€12,248) versus anterior (€16,055). Bootstrapped results demonstrated similar effectiveness between groups with in general lower costs associated with posterior surgery. CONCLUSION: In patients with cervical radiculopathy, arm pain and QALYs were similar between posterior and anterior surgery. Posterior surgery was associated with lower costs and is therefore likely to be cost-effective compared with anterior surgery.

Transforaminal Endoscopic Lumbar Foraminotomy for the Treatment of L5-S1 Isthmic Lumbar Spondylolisthesis with Foraminal Stenosis: A 1-Year Follow-Up.

BACKGROUND: Isthmic lumbar spondylolisthesis (ILS) is a prevalent spinal pathology. Radicular pain in patients is often attributed to L5-S1 ILS combined with foraminal stenosis (FS), making such patients prime candidates for surgical intervention. We herein aimed to elucidate the surgical technique and clinical outcomes of transforaminal endoscopic lumbar foraminotomy (TELF) in the treatment of L5-S1 ILS with FS. METHODS: From September 2021 to December 2022, 20 consecutive patients were diagnosed with L5-S1 ILS with FS and underwent TELF. All patients were followed up for at least 12 months. The clinical outcomes were evaluated using the visual analog scale (VAS), Oswestry Disability Index, and modified MacNab criteria. RESULTS: The mean age of the patients was 62.4 ± 10.9 years. The mean preoperative VAS score for low back, VAS score of the leg, and Oswestry Disability Index score was 5.1 ± 1.7, 7.4 ± 0.7, and 58.0 ± 8.4, respectively. These scores significantly improved to 1.8 ± 0.7, 1.5 ± 0.6, and 15.3 ± 7.1 at 12 months postoperatively, respectively (P < 0.01). Evaluation based on the modified MacNab criteria revealed that 95.0% of patients achieved a good-to-excellent outcome. One patient underwent revision surgery. CONCLUSIONS: TELF emerges as a potentially safe and effective surgical option for alleviating radicular pain in patients with L5-S1 stable ILS combined with FS. While our short-term clinical results are satisfactory, it is necessary to expand the sample size and extend the follow-up time to validate the effectiveness and long-term efficacy of TELF.

Endoscopic Posterior Cervical Foraminotomy Under Lateral Decubitus Position with Local Anesthesia.

BACKGROUND: Endoscopic posterior cervical foraminotomy is gaining popularity among endoscopic spine surgeons for the treatment of radiculopathy caused by foraminal stenosis. METHODS: This study describes a technique using the lateral decubitus position for endoscopic posterior cervical foraminotomy under monitored anesthesia care and local anesthesia only. RESULTS: A total of 10 patients with contraindications to general anesthesia underwent the procedure, resulting in improvement in cervical radicular pain with no perioperative complications. CONCLUSIONS: The findings suggest that this approach is a viable alternative for patients at high risk of general anesthesia care, expanding the surgical options for the treatment of radiculopathy.

Comparing posterior cervical foraminotomy with anterior cervical discectomy and fusion in radiculopathic patients: an analysis from the Quality Outcomes Database.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to compare clinical and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) between posterior foraminotomy and anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) in patients presenting with cervical radiculopathy. METHODS: The Quality Outcomes Database was queried for patients who had undergone ACDF or posterior foraminotomy for radiculopathy. To create two highly homogeneous groups, optimal individual matching was performed at a 5:1 ratio between the two groups on 29 baseline variables (including demographic characteristics, comorbidities, symptoms, patient-reported scores, underlying pathologies, and levels treated). Outcomes of interest were length of stay, reoperations, patient-reported satisfaction, increase in EQ-5D score, and decrease in Neck Disability Index (NDI) scores for arm and neck pain as long as 1 year after surgery. Noninferiority analysis of achieving patient satisfaction and minimal clinically important difference (MCID) in PROs was performed with an accepted risk difference of 5%. RESULTS: A total of 7805 eligible patients were identified: 216 of these underwent posterior foraminotomy and were matched to 1080 patients who underwent ACDF. The patients who underwent ACDF had more underlying pathologies, lower EQ-5D scores, and higher NDI and neck pain scores at baseline. Posterior foraminotomy was associated with shorter hospitalization (0.5 vs 0.9 days, p < 0.001). Reoperations within 12 months were significantly more common among the posterior foraminotomy group (4.2% vs 1.9%, p = 0.04). The two groups performed similarly in PROs, with posterior foraminotomy being noninferior to ACDF in achieving MCID in EQ-5D and neck pain scores but also having lower rates of maximal satisfaction at 12 months (North American Spine Society score of 1 achieved by 65.2% posterior foraminotomy patients vs 74.6% of ACDF patients, p = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: The two procedures were found to be offered to different populations, with ACDF being selected for patients with more complicated pathologies and symptoms. After individual matching, posterior foraminotomy was associated with a higher reoperation risk within 1 year after surgery compared to ACDF (4.2% vs 1.9%). In terms of 12-month PROs, posterior foraminotomy was noninferior to ACDF in improving quality of life and neck pain. The two procedures also performed similarly in improving NDI scores and arm pain, but ACDF patients had higher maximal satisfaction rates.

Comparing outcomes between anterior cervical disc replacement (ACDR) and minimally invasive posterior cervical foraminotomy (MI-PCF) in the treatment of cervical radiculopathy.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Anterior cervical disc replacement (ACDR) and minimally invasive posterior cervical foraminotomy (MI-PCF) have emerged as two increasingly popular alternatives to anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) for the management of cervical radiculopathy. Both techniques provide advantages of segmental motion preservation and lower rates of adjacent segment degeneration (ASD) compared to ACDF. PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to analyze the clinical and functional outcomes of patients undergoing ACDR or MI-PCF for the treatment of unilateral cervical radiculopathy. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: Retrospective Cohort Review. PATIENT SAMPLE: A total of 152 patients were included (86 ACDR and 66 MI-PCF). OUTCOME MEASURES: (1) Patient demographics; (2) perioperative data; (3) rates of complications and revisions; (5) visual analogue scale (VAS) and Neck Disability Index (NDI) scores. METHODS: A retrospective cohort review was performed to identify all patients at a single institution between 2012-2020 who underwent 1- or 2- level ACDR or MI-PCF from C3-C7 with a minimum follow-up of 24 months. Patient demographics, perioperative data, postoperative complications, and revisions were analyzed. Patient reported outcome measures including VAS and NDI scores were compared. RESULTS: The ACDR group had a significantly greater mean operative time (99.8 minutes vs 79.2 minutes, p<.001), but comparable estimated blood loss and length of stay following surgical intervention (p=.899). The overall complication rate was significantly greater in the ACDR group than the MI-PCF group (24.4% vs 6.2%; p=.003) but was largely driven by approach-related dysphagia in 20.9% of ACDR patients. The MI-PCF group had significantly greater revision rates (13.6% vs 1.2%; p=.002) with an average time to revision of 20.7 months in the MI-PCF group compared to 40.3 months in the ACDR group. The ACDR cohort had significantly greater improvements in NDI scores at the final follow-up (25.0 vs 21.3, p<.001). CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that ACDR offer clinically relevant advantages over MI-PCF in terms of long-term revision rates despite an increased approach-related risk of transient postoperative dysphagia. Additionally, patients in the ACDR cohort achieved greater mean improvements in NDI scores but these results may have limited clinical significance due to inability to reach minimally clinically important difference (MCID) thresholds.

Clinical and cost-effectiveness of PCF versus ACD in the treatment of cervical brachialgia (FORVAD trial).

BACKGROUND: Cervical radiculopathy occurs when a nerve root is compressed in the spine, if symptoms fail to resolve after 6 weeks surgery may be indicated. Anterior Cervical Discectomy (ACD) is the commonest procedure, Posterior Cervical Foraminotomy (PCF) is an alternative that avoids the risk of damage to anterior neck structures. This prospective, Phase III, UK multicentre, open, individually randomised controlled trial was performed to determine whether PCF is superior to ACD in terms of improving clinical outcome as measured by the Neck Disability Index (NDI) 52 weeks post-surgery. METHOD: Following consent to participate and collection of baseline data, subjects with cervical brachialgia were randomised to ACD or PCF in a 1:1 ratio on the day of surgery. Clinical outcomes were assessed on day 1 and patient reported outcomes on day 1 and weeks 6, 12, 26, 39 and 52 post-operation. A total of 252 participants were planned to be randomised. Statistical analysis was limited to descriptive statistics. Health economic outcomes were also described. RESULTS: The trial was closed early (n = 23). Compared to baseline, the median (interquartile range (IQR)) NDI score at 52 weeks reduced from 44.0 (36.0, 62.0) to 25.3 (20.0, 42.0) in the PCF group and increased from 35.6 (34.0, 44.0) to 45.0 (20.0, 57.0) in the ACD group. ACD may be associated with more swallowing, voice and other complications and was more expensive; neck and arm pain scores were similar. CONCLUSIONS: The trial was closed early, therefore no definitive conclusions on clinical or cost-effectiveness could be made.

Outcomes and Complications Associated With the Learning Curve for Endoscopic Cervical Foraminotomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

STUDY DESIGN: A systematic review and meta-analysis. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study is to examine the impact of the learning curve for endoscopic cervical foraminotomy for clinical outcomes and patient safety. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Endoscopic cervical foraminotomy is a minimally invasive surgical technique emerging in the literature for surgical management of cervical radiculopathy without the use of open incision. The adoption of endoscopic cervical foraminotomy may be hindered by the learning curve, although no review and meta-analysis exists to date on the topic. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed using PubMed, CINAHL, and MEDLINE from database inception until July 11, 2023. Inclusion criteria were articles that examined endoscopic cervical foraminotomy, reported outcomes, and/or complications for endoscopic cervical spine surgery relevant to the learning curve and had full-text. A random effects meta-analysis was performed for outcomes and complications. RESULTS: A total of three articles (n=203 patients) were included from 792 articles initially retrieved. The learning curves from four surgeons were examined with a FWM 21 procedures until the competency phase. There was no significant difference in the postoperative hospitalization length ( P =0.669), postoperative recovery room time ( P =0.415), intraoperative blood loss ( P =0.064), and total complication rates (10.9% vs . 1.2%, P =0.139) between endoscopic cervical foraminotomy procedures performed in the learning phase as compared with the competency phase of the learning curve. There was a significant decrease in operative time from the learning phase to the competency phase ( P =0.005). CONCLUSION: Competency was achieved on the learning curve for endoscopic cervical foraminotomy after about 21 procedures. There is no significant difference in postoperative hospitalization time, postoperative recovery room time, intraoperative blood loss, and complication rates between the learning phase and the competency phase of the learning curve for endoscopic cervical foraminotomy, noting the relatively small sample size of this study that may underpower this finding.

Channel-assisted cervical key hole technology combined with ultrasonic bone osteotome versus posterior percutaneous endoscopic cervical foraminotomy: a clinical retrospective study.

PURPOSE: The search for more effective and safe treatment methods for cervical spondylotic radiculopathy (CSR) has led to the rapid development and increasing popularity of minimally invasive posterior cervical foraminotomy (MI-PCF). This study aims to compare two important approaches for MI-PCF surgery: the channel-assisted cervical key hole technology combined with ultrasonic bone osteotome (CKH-UBO) and posterior percutaneous endoscopic cervical foraminotomy (PPECF). METHODS: Data from patients treated with single-level CKH-UBO (n = 35) or PPECF (n = 40) were analyzed. Clinical outcomes, including visual analogue scale (VAS) scores for neck and arm pain, Neck Disability Index (NDI), and modified Macnab criteria, were assessed preoperatively, as well as at three days, three months, and one year postoperatively. RESULTS: The percentages of patients with excellent and good outcomes were 97.14% and 92.5%, respectively. The average surgical time in the CKH-UBO group was significantly shorter than in the PPECF group (p < 0.001), while the average incision length in the PPECF group was significantly smaller than in the CKH-UBO group. There were no significant differences between the two groups in terms of blood loss, hospital stay, and clinical outcomes at three days, three months, and 12 months postoperatively. CONCLUSION: CKH-UBO can achieve the same surgical outcomes as PPECF for the treatment of CSR. However, CKH-UBO saves more time but requires patients to undergo larger incisions.

Narrative Review of Uniportal Posterior Endoscopic Cervical Foraminotomy.

Cervical radiculopathy is a common and disabling cervical condition characterized by symptoms including axial neck pain, radicular pain, weakness, and numbness in one or both arms. Common causes include herniated discs and foraminal stenosis, often accompanied by varying degrees of degenerative disc disease and uncovertebral joint hypertrophy. In the treatment of cervical radiculopathy, there is an increasing preference for posterior foraminotomy over anterior cervical discectomy and fusion due to the avoidance of fusion-related complications. As endoscopic spine surgery techniques continue to evolve, there is a rising interest in posterior endoscopic cervical foraminotomy and posterior endoscopic cervical discectomy as effective treatments for cervical radiculopathy. Because these procedures can performed through a single subcentimeter incision with minimal soft tissue damage, they can often be carried out as ambulatory procedures. In this narrative review, we examined current literature addressing the indications, surgical techniques, outcomes, and potential complications associated with posterior cervical endoscopic approaches.

Outcomes and Vertebral Osteophytes and Bulging Intervertebral Discs Occupancy as a Decision-Making Tool for Surgical Success in Patients Undergoing Microendoscopic Foraminotomy for Lumbar Foraminal Stenosis.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to determine the long-term outcomes of microendoscopic foraminotomy in treating lumbar foraminal stenosis and identify the optimal extent of decompression that yields improved results and fewer complications. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study reviewed the medical records of 95 consecutive patients who underwent microendoscopic foraminotomy for lumbar foraminal stenosis. Clinical outcomes were assessed using the Japanese Orthopaedic Association scoring system and visual analog scale for low back and leg pain. Surgical success was determined by meeting significant improvement thresholds for back and leg pain at 2 years postoperatively. Multiple regression analysis identified factors associated with improved pain scores. Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis determined the cut-off values for successful surgeries. RESULTS: Significant improvements were observed in Japanese Orthopaedic Association and visual analog scale scores for back and leg pain 2 years postoperatively compared with preoperative scores (P < 0.0001) and sustained over a ≥5-year follow-up period. Reoperation rates were low and did not significantly increase over time. Multiple regression analysis identified occupancy of the vertebral osteophytes and bulging intervertebral discs (O/D complex) as surgical success predictors. A 45.0% O/D complex occupancy cutoff value was determined, displaying high sensitivity and specificity for predicting surgical success. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides evidence supporting the long-term efficacy of microendoscopic foraminotomy for lumbar foraminal stenosis and predicting surgical success. The 45.0% O/D complex occupancy cut-off value can guide patient selection and outcome prediction. These insights contribute to informed surgical decision-making and underscore the importance of evaluating the O/D complex in preoperative planning and predicting outcomes.

Unilateral Biportal Endoscopic Posterior Cervical Foraminotomy: An Outcome Comparison With the Full-endoscopic Posterior Cervical Foraminotomy.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective control study. OBJECTIVE: To compare the curative effects of unilateral biportal endoscopic posterior cervical foraminotomy (UBE-PCF) with full-endoscopic posterior cervical foraminotomy (FPCF). SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: There are few studies directly comparing outcomes between UBE-PCF and FPCF. The objective of this study was to compare outcomes between UBE-PCF and FPCF. METHODS: A retrospective control study was conducted for 69 patients of cervical radiculopathy from July 2019 to December 2021. Clinical outcomes scores, including neck disability index, visual analog scale (VAS)-arm, and VAS-neck were evaluated. Serum creatine kinase levels and the size of the operating hole were measured. RESULTS: Postoperative neck disability index, VAS-neck, and VAS-arm scores showed statistically significant improvement over preoperative scores ( P <0.01). The operating time was significantly shorter in the UBE-PCF group ( P <0.001). No significant differences were found in serum creatine kinase levels between the 2 groups ( P >0.05). The mean area of the operating hole was 1.47+0.05 cm 2 in the FPCF group and 1.79+0.11 cm 2 in the UBE-PCF group. The difference was statistically significant ( P <0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Both UBE-PCF and FPCF are safe and effective procedures for cervical radiculopathy. Predictable and sufficient decompression could be achieved by UBE-PCF in a shorter operation time. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Treatment Benefits Level III.

Impact of Posterior Cervical Foraminotomy Before or After Cervical Disk Replacement: Current Evidence.

STUDY DESIGN: Narrative review. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to provide a review of the current evidence on the impact of posterior cervical foraminotomy (PCF) performed before or after cervical disk replacement (CDR). SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: The impact of PCF on outcomes in the setting of CDR is an evolving field, given the recent widespread adoption of CDR and the relative rarity of patients who have undergone both procedures. METHODS: A literature search was conducted using PubMed to determine current evidence regarding the indications, outcomes, and biomechanical effects of CDR and PCF when performed alone or in combination. RESULTS: When radicular symptoms persist following PCF, a CDR can be safely performed to provide further decompression. Conversely, a PCF can be safely performed following CDR for these same indications. The biomechanical effects of these procedures in combination demonstrate maintained stability when the facetectomy is less than 50% of the facet joint. Studies demonstrate that stability is not significantly decreased by the presence, amount, or level of posterior foraminotomies in the setting of CDR. CONCLUSIONS: A PCF can be safely performed before or after cervical disk arthroplasty for recurrent radicular symptoms. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level V.

Microendoscopic Posterior Cervical Laminoforaminotomy for C4 Radiculopathy.

OBJECTIVE: Cervical microendoscopic laminoforaminotomy (MELF) has been proven to be an effective, motion preserving procedure for the surgical treatment of cervical radiculopathy. Cervical 4 (C4) radiculopathies are often unrecognized by the initial evaluating physician and may be misdiagnosed as axial neck pain. In this study, we compare MELF to anterior cervical disk fusion (ACDF) for C4 radiculopathy in the largest series of minimally invasive foraminotomy for C4 radiculopathy to date. METHODS: This is a single-institution retrospective chart review of 42 cases for C4 radiculopathy, 21 MELF and 21 ACDF. Primary outcome measures were length of surgery, length of hospital stay, and time to return to work. Secondary outcome measures were visual analog scale (VAS) neck pain and reoperation rate. RESULTS: All patients were diagnosed with a unilateral C4 radiculopathy using magnetic resonance imaging or steroid injections. The length of surgery and length of hospital stay were significantly decreased in the MELF group compared with ACDF. VAS neck pain significantly decreased for patients in both groups, but the difference between MELF and ACDF was not statistically significant. There were no major complications. No patient underwent revision at the index level or adjacent levels in the MELF group. CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrate that C4 radiculopathy can be identified with appropriate history, physical examination, and targeted nerve root injections. When identified, these radiculopathies that fail conservative therapy can be effectively treated with cervical microendoscopic laminoforaminotomy, with comparable outcomes to ACDF. The length of surgery and length of stay are reduced when compared with ACDF.

Single-level Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion Results in Lower Five-year Revisions than Posterior Cervical Foraminotomy in a Large National Cohort.

STUDY DESIGN: A retrospective cohort study using the 2010-2020 MSpine PearlDiver administrative data set. OBJECTIVE: To compare perioperative adverse events and five-year revisions for single-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) versus posterior cervical foraminotomy (PCF). SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Cervical disk disease can often be treated surgically using single-level ACDF or PCF. Prior studies have suggested that posterior approaches provide similar short-term outcomes as ACDF; however, posterior procedures may have an increased risk of revision surgery. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The database was queried for patients undergoing elective single-level ACDF or PCF (excluding cases performed for myelopathy, trauma, neoplasm, and/or infection). Outcomes, including specific complications, readmission, and reoperations, were assessed. Multivariable logistic regression was used to ascertain odds ratios (OR) of 90-day adverse events controlling for age, sex, and comorbidities. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis was performed to determine five-year rates of cervical reoperation in the ACDF and PCF cohorts. RESULTS: A total of 31,953 patients treated by ACDF (29,958, 93.76%) or PCF (1995, 6.24%) were identified. Multivariable analysis, controlling for age, sex, and comorbidities, demonstrated that PCF was associated with significantly greater odds of aggregated serious adverse events (OR 2.17, P <0.001), wound dehiscence (OR 5.89, P <0.001), surgical site infection (OR 3.66, P <0.001), and pulmonary embolism (OR 1.72, P =0.04). However, PCF was associated with significantly lower odds of readmission (OR 0.32, P <0.001), dysphagia (OR 0.44, P <0.001), and pneumonia (OR 0.50, P =0.004). At five years, PCF cases had a significantly higher cumulative revision rate compared with ACDF cases (19.0% vs. 14.8%, P <0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The current study is the largest to date to compare short-term adverse events and five-year revision rates between single-level ACDF and PCF for nonmyelopathy elective cases. Perioperative adverse events differed by procedure, and it was notable that the incidence of cumulative revisions was higher for PCF. These findings can be used in decision-making when there is clinical equipoise between ACDF and PCF.

Full-endoscopic foraminotomy in low-grade degenerative and isthmic spondylolisthesis: a patient-specific tailored approach.

PURPOSE: To describe the surgical technique and methodology to successfully plan and execute an endoscopic foraminotomy in patients with isthmic or degenerative spondylolisthesis, according to each patient's unique characteristics. METHODS: Thirty patients with degenerative or isthmic spondylolisthesis (SL) with radicular symptoms were included from March 2019 to September 2022. Treating physician registered patients' baseline and imaging characteristics, as well as preoperative back pain VAS, leg pain VAS and ODI. Subsequently, authors treated the included patients with an endoscopic foraminotomy according to a "patient-specific" tailored approach. RESULTS: Nineteen patients (63.33%) had isthmic SL and 11 patients (36.67%) had degenerative SL. 75.86% of the cases had a Meyerding Grade 1 listhesis. One of the transforaminal foraminotomies with lateral recess decompression in degenerative SL had to be aborted because of intense osseous bleeding. Of the remaining 29 patients, one patient experienced recurrence of the sciatica pain that required subsequent reintervention and fusion. No other intraoperative or post-operative complications were observed. None of the patients developed post-operative dysesthesia. In 86.67% of the patients, the foraminotomy was implemented using a transforaminal approach. In the remaining 13.33% of the cases, an interlaminar contralateral approach was used. Lateral recess decompression was performed in half of the cases. Mean follow-up time was 12.69 months, reaching a maximum of 40 months in some patients. Outcome variables such as VAS for leg and back pain, as well as ODI, showed statistically significant reduction since the 3-month follow-up visit. CONCLUSION: In the presented case series, endoscopic foraminotomy achieved satisfactory outcomes without sacrificing segmental stability. The proposed patient-specific "tailored" approach allowed to successfully design and execute the surgical strategy to perform an endoscopic foraminotomy through transforaminal or interlaminar contralateral approaches.