Impact of C3 laminectomy on cervical sagittal alignment in cervical laminoplasty: a prospective, randomized controlled trial comparing clinical and radiological outcomes between C3 laminectomy with C4–C6 laminoplasty and C3–C6 laminoplasty

Abstract

Background ContextC3 laminectomy in cervical laminoplasty is a modified laminoplasty technique that can preserve the semispinalis cervicis muscle attached to the C2 spinous process. Several previous studies have shown that this technique can lead to better outcomes of postoperative axial neck pain and C2–C3 range of motion (ROM) than conventional cervical laminoplasty. However, there is still a lack of understanding of total and proportional postoperative cervical sagittal alignment outcomes. PurposeTo assess the effects of C3 laminectomy in cervical laminoplasty on postoperative cervical alignment and clinical outcomes. DesignA single-center, patient-blinded, randomized controlled trial. Patient SampleWe included consecutive 126 patients diagnosed with cervical spondylotic myelopathy (CSM) or ossification of posterior longitudinal ligament (OPLL) who were scheduled for cervical laminoplasty from March 2017 to January 2020. Outcome MeasuresThe primary outcome measures were C2–C7 Cobb angle (CA) and neck disability index (NDI). Secondary outcomes measures included other clinical outcomes and radiographic parameters including segmental Cobb angle and presence of C2–C3 interlaminar fusion. MethodsPatients were randomly allocated to either the C3 laminectomy with C4–C6 laminoplasty group (LN group) or the C3–C6 laminoplasty group (LP group) at a 1:1 ratio. Laminoplasty was performed using a unilateral open-door technique and stabilized with titanium mini plates. A linear mixed model analysis was employed to examine the longitudinal data from postoperative 1-year through 3-year. Additional analysis between three types of cervical sagittal alignment morphology was done. ResultsAmong 122 patients who were randomly allocated to one of two groups (LN group, n=61; LP group, n=61), modified intent-to-treat analysis was done for 109 patients (LN group, n=51, LP group, n=58) who had available at least a year of postoperative data. Postoperative C2–C7 CA was not significantly different between the two groups. However, NDI was significantly different between the two groups (12.8±1.0 in the LN group vs 8.6±1.0 in LP group, p=.005), which exceeded the minimum clinically important difference (MCID). The postoperative C2–C3 CA was significantly greater in the LN group (7.1±0.5° in LN group vs 3.2±0.5° in LP group, p<.001) while C4–C7 CA was significantly smaller in the LN group (3.9±0.8° in LN group vs 7.7±0.7° in LP group, p<.001) with greater cSVA in the LN group (31.6±1.4 mm in LN group vs 25.5±1.3 mm in LP group at postoperative 3-year, p=.002). Postoperative Euro-Quality of Life-5 Dimension (EQ-5D), numerical rating scores for neck pain (NRS-N) were significantly better in the LP group than in the LN group (all p<.05) and only EQ-5D surpassed the MCID. The C2-C3 fusion rate was significantly different between the LN group (9.8%) and the LP group (44.8%) (p<.001). The LN group showed a higher prevalence of a specific cervical alignment morphology characterized by a sigmoid shape with proximal lordosis and distal kyphosis (S curve). This S curve demonstrated significantly unfavorable outcomes across multiple outcome variables. ConclusionThe impact of C3 laminectomy in cervical laminoplasty on postoperative kyphosis among patients with CSM or OPLL did not significantly differ from that of C3–C6 laminoplasty. However, C3 laminectomy in cervical laminoplasty might result in an unfavorable clinical outcome with an unbalanced cervical sagittal alignment characterized by a sigmoid shape with proximal lordosis and distal kyphosis.