Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Limitations of activities of daily living accompanying reduced neck mobility after cervical laminoplasty

Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Introduction

After laminoplasty, difficulties with neck mobility often interfere with patients’ activities of daily living (ADL). Although it has been reported that the flexion–extension range of motion significantly decreased after laminoplasty, in many studies using radiographs there were few patient-based outcomes. The purpose of this study was to reveal the frequency, severity and factors related to limitations of ADL accompanying neck mobility after laminoplasty.

Materials and methods

A total of 58 patients were evaluated after laminoplasty to determine the frequency, severity and pre- and postoperative related factors of postoperative limitations of ADL accompanying each of three neck movements: (1) extension, (2) flexion and (3) rotation. The severity of limitations of each ADL was assessed using a questionnaire that was completed by the patient.

Results

Difficulties in neck movement, such as rotation (41%), extension (34%) and flexion (17%), in that order (P = 0.001), caused limitations of ADL. The most relevant factor of limitations of ADL accompanying extension, flexion, and rotation were small postoperative O–C7 range of motion (P = 0.0001), small preoperative O–C7 range of motion (P = 0.001), and small postoperative rotation range of motion (P = 0.0005), respectively.

Conclusion

There were more than a few patients with limitations of ADL accompanying reduced neck mobility after laminoplasty. This knowledge may be useful in the clinical outcomes of cervical laminoplasty.

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

Access this article

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

References

  1. Baba H, Mezawa Y, Furusawa N, Imura S, Tomita K (1995) Flexibility and alignment of the cervical spine after laminoplasty for spondylotic myelopathy: a radiographic study. Int Orthop 19:116–121

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Bartko JJ (1966) The intraclass correlation coefficient as a measure of reliability. Psychol Rep 19:3–11

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Bennett S, Schenk R, Simmons ED (2002) Active range of motion utilized in the cervical spine to perform daily functional tasks. J Spinal Disord 15:307–311

    Google Scholar 

  4. Chiba K, Toyama Y, Matsumoto M, Maruiwa H, Watanabe M, Hirabayashi K (2002) Segmental motor paralysis after expensive open-door laminoplasty. Spine 19:2108–2115

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Fujimura Y, Nishi Y (1996) Atrophy of the nuchal muscle and change in cervical curvature after expansive open-door laminoplasty. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 115:203–205

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Hirabayashi K, Miyakawa J, Satomi K, Maruyama T, Wakano K (1981) Operative results and postoperative progression of ossification among patients with ossification of cervical posterior longitudinal ligament. Spine 6:354–364

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Hosono N, Yonenobu K, Ono K (1996) Neck and shoulder pain after laminoplasty: a noticeable complication. Spine 21:1969–1973

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Iizuka H, Shimizu T, Tateno K, Toda N, Edakuni H, Shimada H, Takagishi K (2001) Extensor musculature of the cervical spine after laminoplasty: morphologic evaluation by coronal view of the magnetic resonance image. Spine 26:2220–2226

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Iwasaki M, Kawaguchi Y, Kimura T, Yonenobu K (2002) Long-term expensive laminoplasty for ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament of the cervical spine: more than 10 years follow-up. J Neurosurg 96(2 Suppl):180–189

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Kawaguchi Y, Kanamori M, Ishihara H, Ohmori K, Nakamura H, Kimura T (2003) Minimum 10-year follow-up after en bloc cervical laminoplasty. Clin Orthop 294:129–139

    Google Scholar 

  11. Kawaguchi Y, Kanamori M, Ishihara H, Nobukiyo M, Seki S, Kimura T (2003) Preventive measures for axial symptoms following cervical laminoplasty. J Spinal Disord 16:497–501

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Kawaguchi Y, Matsui H, Ishihara H, Gejo R, Yoshino O (1999) Axial symptoms after en bloc cervical laminoplasty. J Spinal Disord 12:392–395

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Kawaguchi Y, Matsui H, Ishihara H, Gejo R, Yasuda T (2000) Surgical outcome of cervical expansive laminoplasty in patients with diabetes mellitus. Spine 25:551–555

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Kimura I, Shingu H, Nasu Y, Shiotani A, Oh-hama M, Murata M (1995) Lon-term follow-up of cervical spondylotic myelopathy treated by canal-expansive laminoplasty. J Bone Joint Surg 77B:956–961

    Google Scholar 

  15. Komagata M, Nishiyama M, Endo K, Ikegami H, Tanaka S, Imakiire A (2004) Prophylaxis of C5 palsy after cervical expansive laminoplasty by bilateral partial foraminotomy. Spine J 4:650–655

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Minoda Y, Nakamura H, Konishi S, Nagayama R, Suzuki E, Yamano Y, Takaoka K (2003) Palsy of the C5 nerve root after midsagittal-splitting laminoplasty of the cervical spine. Spine 28:1123–1127

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Nakano K, Harata S, Suetsuna F, Araki T, Itoh J (1992) Spinous process-splitting laminoplasty using hydroxyapatite spinous process spacer. Spine 17:S41–S43

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Ogawa Y, Chiba K, Matsumoto M, Nakamura M, Takaishi H, Hirabayashi K, Nishiwaki Y, Toyama Y (2005) Long-term results after expansive open-door laminoplasty for the segmental-type of ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament of the cervical spine: a comparison with nonsegmental-type lesions. J Neurosurg 3:198–204

    Google Scholar 

  19. Sasai K, Saito T, Araki S, Kato I, Ogawa R (2000) Cervical curvature after laminoplasty for spondylotic myelopathy: involvement of yellow ligament, semispinalis cervicis muscle, and nuchal ligament. J Spinal Disord 13:26–30

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Sasai K, Saito T, Akagi S, Kato I, Ohnari H, Iida H (2003) Preventing C5 palsy after laminoplasty. Spine 28:1972–1977

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Satomi K, Nishu Y, Kohno T, Hirabayashi K (1994) Long-term follow-up studies of open-door expansive laminoplasty for cervical stenotic myelopathy. Spine 19:507–510

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Seichi A, Takeshita K, Ohishi I, Kawaguchi H, Akune T, Anamizu Y, Kitagawa T, Nakamura K (2001) Long-term results of double-door laminoplasty for cervical stenotic myelopathy. Spine 26:479–487

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Shiraishi T, Fukuda K, Yato Y, Nakamura M, Ikegami T (2003) Results of skip laminectomy: minimum 2-year follow-up study compared with open-door laminoplasty. Spine 28:2667–2672

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Suda K, Abumi K, Ito M, Shono Y, Kaneda K, Fujiya M (2003) Local kyphosis reduces surgical outcomes of expansive open-door laminoplasty for cervical spondylotic myelopathy. Spine 28:1258–1262

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Takeshita K, Seichi A, Akune T, Kawamura N, Kawaguchi H, Nakamura K (2005) Can laminoplasty maintain the cervical alignment even when the C2 lamina is contained? Spine 30:1294–1298

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Takeuchi K, Yokoyama T, Aburakawa S, Ueyama K, Ito J, Sannohe A, Okada A, Toh S (2006) Inadvertent C2–C3 union after C1–C2 posterior fusion in adults. Eur Spine J 15:270–277

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Takeuchi K, Yokoyama T, Aburakawa S, Saito A, Numasawa T, Iwasaki T, Itabashi T, Okada A, Ito J, Ueyama K, Toh S (2005) Axial symptoms after cervical laminoplasty with C3 laminectomy compared with conventional C3–C7 laminoplasty: a modified laminoplasty preserving the semispinalis cervicis inserted into axis. Spine 30:2544–2549

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Tomita K, Kawahara N, Toribatake Y, Heller JG (1998) Expansive midline T-saw laminoplasty (modified spinous-splitting) for the management of cervical myelopathy. Spine 23:32–37

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Wada E, Suzuki S, Kanazawa A, Matsuoka T, Miyamoto S, Yonenobu K (2001) Subtotal corpectomy versus laminoplasty for multilevel cervical spondylotic myelopathy: a long-term follow-up study over 10 years. Spine 26:1443–1447

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Yoshida M, Otani K, Shibasaki K, Ueda S (1992) Expansive laminoplasty with reattachment of spinous process and extensor musculature for cervical myelopathy. Spine 17:491–497

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Yoshida M, Tamaki T, Kawakami M, Nakatani N, Ando M, Yamada H, Hayashi N (2002) Does reconstruction of posterior ligamentous complex with extensor musculature decrease axial symptoms after cervical laminoplasty? Spine 27:1414–1418

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kazunari Takeuchi.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Takeuchi, K., Yokoyama, T., Ono, A. et al. Limitations of activities of daily living accompanying reduced neck mobility after cervical laminoplasty. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 127, 475–480 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00402-007-0372-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00402-007-0372-1

Keywords

Navigation