A meta-analysis of prospective studies comparing the results of laminoplasty and laminectomy with instrumental fixation in the surgical treatment of patients with multilevel degenerative cervical spine diseases

Abstract

Background: Dorsal decompressive-stabilizing techniques laminotomy with laminoplasty (LP) and laminectomy with instrumental fixation (LF) are effective methods for surgical treatment of patients with multi-level degenerative diseases of the cervical spine. At the same time, there is currently no priority in determining the optimal method for posterior decompression and stabilization.
 Aim: conduct a comparative analysis of intraoperative parameters, clinical outcomes, radiological results and complications of LP and LF in the treatment of patients with multilevel degenerative diseases of the cervical spine.
 Methods: A meta-analysis of prospective cohort clinical trials was carried out, the primary sources were searched using the databases PubMed, CNKI, eLibrary and the Cochrane Library, published until March 2019, which compared the results of applying the LP and LF methods in the treatment of patients with multilevel degenerative diseases of the cervical spine. For dichotomous variables, the relative risk and the 95% confidence interval were calculated; in turn, for the continuous variables, the standardized difference of the mean values and their 95% confidence intervals were used, using random effect models and a fixed effect.
 Resuts: The meta-analysis included 6 prospective clinical trials, one of which was a randomized controlled trial. In total, the results of surgical treatment of 493 patients with multilevel degenerative diseases of the cervical spine were evaluated. In the group of drugs, statistically significantly smaller parameters of the duration of surgical intervention were verified (p 0.00001). At the same time, comparable parameters of cervical lordosis after surgery, the level of pain in the cervical spine, functional status according to NDI and JOA after surgery, the frequency of perioperative complications (p = 0.17, p = 0.05, p = 0.94, p = 0.96, p = 0.24, respectively).
 Conclusions: A meta-analysis showed that the functional outcomes of LP and LF, as well as instrumental results in the treatment of multilevel degenerative diseases of the cervical spine, are not clinically significant. In this case, the LP technique can be performed in a shorter period of time compared with LF.