Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Bilateral spinal canal decompression via hemilaminectomy in cervical spondylotic myelopathy

  • How I Do it - Spine
  • Published:
Acta Neurochirurgica Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

In cervical spondylotic myelopathy (CSM), laminoplasty (LP) or laminectomy plus fusion (LF) are accepted operative options and alternatives to anterior approaches. Both LP and LF have distinctive disadvantages, which might be avoided by unilateral hemilaminectomy and bilateral decompression of the spinal cord.

Methods

Description of the surgical technique, indications, and limitations. The potential advantages in comparison to LP and LF are discussed.

Conclusions

Unilateral hemilaminectomy allows bilateral decompression of the whole dorsal circumference of spinal cord from nerve root to nerve root. The potential major advantages are a reduction of invasiveness by only unilateral muscle detachment, avoidance of implants, and shorter operation times.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Fehlings MG, Smith JS, Kopjar B, Arnold PM, Yoon ST, Vaccaro AR, Brodke DS, Janssen ME, Chapman JR, Sasso RC, Woodard EJ, Banco RJ, Massicotte EM, Dekutoski MB, Gokaslan ZL, Bono CM, Shaffrey CI (2012) Perioperative and delayed complications associated with the surgical treatment of cervical spondylotic myelopathy based on 302 patients from the AOSpine North America cervical spondylotic myelopathy study. J Neurosurg Spine 16:425–432

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Ghogawala Z, Martin B, Benzel EC, Dziura J, Magge SN, Abbed KM, Bisson EF, Shahid J, Coumans JV, Choudhri TF, Steinmetz MP, Krishnaney AA, King JT Jr, Butler WE, Barker FG 2nd, Heary RF (2011) Comparative effectiveness of ventral vs dorsal surgery for cervical spondylotic myelopathy. Neurosurgery 68:622–631

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Kadanka Z, Bednarik J, Novotny O (2011) Cervical spondylotic myelopathy: conservative versus surgical treatment after 10 years. Eur Spine J 20:1533–1538

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. König SA, Spetzger U (2014) Modified open-door laminoplasty for the surgical treatment of cervical spondylotic myelopathy in elderly patients. Acta Neurochir 156:1225–1230

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Oertel MF, Ryang YM, Korinth MC, Gilsbach JM, Rohde V (2006) Long-term results of microsurgical treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis by unilateral laminotomy for bilateral decompression. Neurosurgery 59:1264–1269

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Sakai K, Okawa A, Takahashi M, Arai Y, Kawabata S, Enomoto M, Kato T, Hirai T, Shinomiya K (2012) Five-year follow-up evaluation of surgical treatment for cervical myelopathy caused by ossification of the posterior ligament. Spine 37:367–376

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Taniyama T, Hirai T, Yoshii T, Yamada T, Yasuda H, Saito M, Inose H, Kato T, Kawabata S, Okawa A (2014) Modified K-line in magnetic resonance imaging predicts clinical outcome in patients with nonlordotic alignment after laminoplasty for cervical spondylotic myelopathy. Spine 39:E1261–E1268

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of interest

All authors certify that they have no affiliations with or involvement in any organization or entity with any financial interest (such as honoraria; educational grants; participation in speakers’ bureaus; membership, employment, consultancies, stock ownership, or other equity interest; and expert testimony or patent-licensing arrangements), or non-financial interest (such as personal or professional relationships, affiliations, knowledge or beliefs) in the subject matter or materials discussed in this manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Neurosurgery, Georg-August-University Göttingen, Robert-Koch-Strasse 40, 37075, Göttingen, Germany

    Dorothee Mielke & Veit Rohde

  2. Klinik und Poliklinik für Neurochirurgie, Georg-August-Universität Göttingen, Robert-Koch-Strasse 40, 37075, Göttingen, Germany

    Dorothee Mielke

Authors
  1. Dorothee Mielke
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Veit Rohde
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Dorothee Mielke.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

ESM 1

The approach in this case is from the right side. After muscle detachment from the hemilaminae, primarily a hemilaminectomy is performed. Care is taken to preserve the integrity of the facet joint. The next step is removal of the base of the spinous process(es) with the drill and Kerrison rongeur, beginning at the medial edge of the hemilaminectomy and ending near the contralateral medial part of the facet joint(s), thereby thinning the inner contralateral hemilaminae. The hypertrophied ligament is further being removed. Bleeding from the epidural veins can easily be managed by coagulation and GELFOAM (MP4 87643 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Mielke, D., Rohde, V. Bilateral spinal canal decompression via hemilaminectomy in cervical spondylotic myelopathy. Acta Neurochir 157, 1813–1817 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00701-015-2549-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00701-015-2549-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation