Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Predictive factors of cervical spondylotic myelopathy in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis

  • Orthopaedic Surgery
  • Published:
Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objective

To analyze cervical spondylotic myelopathy (CSM) predictive factors in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS).

Methods

Two hundred thirty-seven patients who visited for low back pain, lower limb pain and/or lower limb numbness and who were diagnosed with LSS were enrolled in this study. The ratio of males to females was 117–120, and the mean age was 68.8 years (range 45–87 years). LSS and CSM were diagnosed by characteristic symptoms, physical findings and MRI. We examined gender, age, Torg-Pavlov ratio (TPR), spondylolisthesis or spondylosis, LSS symptom types and number of stenosis segments with LSS to clarify predictive factors for CSM.

Results

There were 21 (8.86%) patients with coexistent CSM among 237 LSS patients. CSM morbidity was significantly more common among males compared with females. TPR was 0.71 ± 0.09 in the CSM patients and 0.81 ± 0.10 in the non-CSM patients. TPR of the CSM patients was significantly smaller than that of the non-CSM patients. We analyzed to determine the predictive factors of CSM and TPR was identified. The predictive value of TPR for CSM was 0.78.

Conclusion

Torg-Pavlov ratio was the most important predictive factor of CSM in patients with LSS.

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.

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Naderi S, Mertol T (2002) Simultaneous cervical and lumbar surgery for combined symptomatic cervical and lumbar spinal stenosis. J spinal Disord Tech 15:229–231

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. LaBan MM, Green ML (2004) Concurrent (tandem) cervical and lumbar spinal stenosis: a 10-yr review of 54 hospitalized patients. Am J Phys Med Rehabil 83:187–190

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Aydogan M, Ozturk C, Mirzanli C, Karatoprak O, Tezer M, Hamzaoqlu A (2007) Treatment approach in tandem (concurrent) cervical and lumbar spinal stenosis. Acta Orthop Belg 73:234–237

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Kikuike K, Miyamoto K, Hosoe H, Shimizu K (2009) One-staged combined cervical and lumbar decompression for patients with tandem spinal stenosis on cervical and lumbar spine: analyses of clinical outcomes with minimum 3 years follow-up. J spinal Disord Tech 22:593–601

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Eskander MS, Aubin ME, Drew JM, Eskander JP, Balsis SM, Eck J, Lapinsky AS, Connolly PJ (2010) Is there a difference between simultaneous or staged decompressios for combined cervical and lumbar stenosis? J Spinal Disord Tech

  6. Teng P, Papatheodorou C (1964) Combined cervical and lumbar spondylosis. Arch Neurol 10:298–307

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Jacobs B, Ghelman B, Marchisello P (1990) Coexistence of cervical and lumbar disc disease. Spine 15:1261–1264

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Lee SH, Kim KT, Suk KS, Lee JH, Shin JH, So DH, Kwack YH (2010) Asymptomatic cervical cord compression in lumbar spinal stenosis patients: a whole spine magnetic resonance imaging study. Spine 35:2057–2063

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Torg JS, Pavlov H, Genuario SE, Sennett B, Wisneski RJ, Robie BH, Jahre C (1986) Neurapraxia of the cervical spinal cord with transient quadriplegia. J Bone Jt Surg Am 68:1354–1370

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Taillard W (1955) Le spondylolisthesis chez l’enfant et l’adolescent (Etude de 50 cas). Acta Orthop Scandinav 24:115–144

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Schizas C, Theumann N, Burn A, Tansey R, Wardlaw D, Smith FW, Kulik G (2010) Qualitative grading of severity of lumbar spinal stenosis based on the morphology of the dural sac on magnetic resonance images. Spine 35:1919–1924

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Yue WN, Tan SB, Tan MH, Koh DC, Tan CT (2001) The Torg-Pavlov ratio in cervical spondylotic myelopathy: a comparative study between patients with cervical spondylotic myelopathy and a nonspondylotic, nonmyelopathic population. Spine 26:1760–1764

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Lee MJ, Garcia R, Cassinelli EH, Furey C, Riew KD (2008) Tandem stenosis: a cadaveric study in osseous morphology. Spine J 8:1003–1006

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Kokubun S, Sato T, Ishii Y, Tanaka Y (1996) Cervical myelopathy in the Japanese. Clin Orthop Relat Res 323:129–138

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Hukuda S, Kojima Y (2002) Sex discrepancy in the canal/body ratio of the cervical spine implicating the prevalence of cervical myelopathy in men. Spine 27:250–253

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Lees F, Turner JW (1963) Natural history and prognosis of cervical spondylosis. Br Med J 2:1607–1610

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Clarke E, Robinson PK (1956) Cervical myelopathy: a complication of cervical spondylosis. Brain 79:483–510

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Nurick S (1972) The natural history and the results of surgical treatment of the spinal cord disorder associated with cervical spondylosis. Brain 95:101–108

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Chen IH, Liao KK, Shen WY (1994) Measurement of cervical canal sagittal diameter in Chinese males with cervical spondylotic myelopathy. Chin Med J 54:105–110

    CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hideki Iizuka.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Iizuka, H., Takahashi, K., Tanaka, S. et al. Predictive factors of cervical spondylotic myelopathy in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 132, 607–611 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00402-012-1465-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00402-012-1465-z

Keywords

Navigation