Comparative Study between Anterior and Posterior Approaches in Management of Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy

Abstract

Background The best surgical approach for management of degenerative cervical myelopathy remains area of debate between spinal surgeons. The purpose of this study compare between anterior approach (anterior cervical discectomy with fusion) and posterior approach (laminectomy with and without fusion) for treatment of multilevel spondylotic myelopathy according to clinical, radiological outcomes, recovery rates and complications. Material and Methods A total of 20 patients were operated by anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) and 20 patients were operated by cervical laminectomy with and without fusion in this study. Preoperative and postoperative clinical assessment were done using modified Japanese Orthopedic Association (mJOA) score and Myelopathy scale (MS). Postoperative complications, recovery rate and intraoperative blood loss are recorded. Preoperative and postoperative radiological analysis were done using Cobb angle measurement (C2-7 angle) and canal diameter assessment by measuring the canal through the center of each vertebra and intervertebral discs (C2–C7) on 10 transverse planes on mid-sagittal T2WI image. Results There was significant decrease in pre-operative mJOA scale in posterior approach group; compared to anterior group (P = 0.41). There was highly significant decrease in duration of symptoms in anterior approach group; compared to anterior group (P < 0.01) and significant decrease in pre-operative MS scale in anterior approach group; compared to anterior group (P < 0.05). There is non-significant difference as regards post-operative mJOA scale and MS scale between anterior and posterior group (p > 0.05). Although recovery rate was higher in anterior group than posterior group (49.5 ± 27.2 vs 39.51 ± 11.30), but finally There was no significant difference as regards postoperative recovery, improvement and complications rates (p > 0.05). postoperative canal diameter change was greater in posterior surgery than anterior group (11.1 ± 1.98 vs 9.5 ± 0.76). Reoperation rate was higher in anterior group. Postoperative C5 palsy and axial neck pain were higher in posterior group. Conclusions Both anterior and posterior approaches were successful to treat multilevel CSM, but no definitive surgical approach was proved for management of CSM and each case should be evaluated carefully for determination of best surgical approach according to preoperative Cobb angle and canal diameter.