Posterior Decompression for Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy: Laminectomy, Laminectomy and Fusion or Laminoplasty

  • Fan Jiang
  • Hiroyuki Katoh
  • Kazuya Yokota
  • Michael G. FehlingsEmail author


Degenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM) represents a spectrum of chronic atraumatic spinal cord injury that occurs secondary to compression from disc spondylosis, hypertrophy of the ligamentum flavum, or ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament (OPLL), etc. [1]. While surgical management has been shown to arrest the progressive deterioration and provide neurological and functional improvement, the selection of surgical procedures pertaining to specific cases is subject to much controversy [2–4]. While the subject of anterior versus posterior spinal decompression has been repeatedly debated amongst the experts, this chapter will focus on posterior surgical options and anterior alternatives will not be further elaborated.


Cervical spondylotic myelopathy Laminectomy Laminoplasty Fusion 


  1. 1.
    Nouri A, Tetreault L, Singh A, et al. Degenerative cervical myelopathy: epidemiology, genetics, and pathogenesis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2015;40:E675–93.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Badhiwala JH, Wilson JR. The natural history of degenerative cervical myelopathy. Neurosurg Clin N Am. 2018;29:21–32.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Fehlings MG, Wilson JR, Kopjar B, et al. Efficacy and safety of surgical decompression in patients with cervical spondylotic myelopathy: results of the AOSpine North America prospective multi-center study. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2013;95:1651–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Lawrence BD, Jacobs WB, Norvell DC, et al. Anterior versus posterior approach for treatment of cervical spondylotic myelopathy: a systematic review. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2013;38:S173–82.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Geck MJ, Eismont FJ. Surgical options for the treatment of cervical spondylotic myelopathy. Orthop Clin North Am. 2002;33:329–48.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Carol MP, Ducker TB. Cervical spondylitic myelopathies: surgical treatment. J Spinal Disord. 1988;1:59–65.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Epstein JA. The surgical management of cervical spinal stenosis, spondylosis, and myeloradiculopathy by means of the posterior approach. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1988;13:864–9.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kaptain GJ, Simmons NE, Replogle RE, et al. Incidence and outcome of kyphotic deformity following laminectomy for cervical spondylotic myelopathy. J Neurosurg. 2000;93:199–204.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hansen-Schwartz J, Kruse-Larsen C, Nielsen CJ. Follow-up after cervical laminectomy, with special reference to instability and deformity. Br J Neurosurg. 2003;17:301–5.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kato Y, Iwasaki M, Fuji T, et al. Long-term follow-up results of laminectomy for cervical myelopathy caused by ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament. J Neurosurg. 1998;89:217–23.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Yonenobu K, Okada K, Fuji T, et al. Causes of neurologic deterioration following surgical treatment of cervical myelopathy. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1986;11:818–23.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    An HS, Coppes MA. Posterior cervical fixation for fracture and degenerative disc disease. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1997;335:101–11.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Nazarian SM, Louis RP. Posterior internal fixation with screw plates in traumatic lesions of the cervical spine. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1991;16:S64–71.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Jeanneret B, Magerl F, Ward EH, et al. Posterior stabilization of the cervical spine with hook plates. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1991;16:S56–63.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Anderson PA, Henley MB, Grady MS, et al. Posterior cervical arthrodesis with AO reconstruction plates and bone graft. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1991;16:S72–9.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Ebraheim NA, Rupp RE, Savolaine ER, et al. Posterior plating of the cervical spine. J Spinal Disord. 1995;8:111–5.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Benzel EC, Kesterson L. Posterior cervical interspinous compression wiring and fusion for mid to low cervical spinal injuries. J Neurosurg. 1989;70:893–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    al Baz MO, Mathur N. Modified technique of tension band wiring in flexion injuries of the middle and lower cervical spine. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1995;20:1241–4.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Deen HG, Nottmeier EW, Reimer R. Early complications of posterior rod-screw fixation of the cervical and upper thoracic spine. Neurosurgery. 2006;59:1062–7; discussion 7-8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Deen HG, Birch BD, Wharen RE, et al. Lateral mass screw-rod fixation of the cervical spine: a prospective clinical series with 1-year follow-up. Spine J. 2003;3:489–95.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Blizzard DJ, Caputo AM, Sheets CZ, et al. Laminoplasty versus laminectomy with fusion for the treatment of spondylotic cervical myelopathy: short-term follow-up. Eur Spine J. 2017;26:85–93.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Heller JG, Edwards ICC, Murakami H, et al. Laminoplasty versus laminectomy and fusion for multilevel cervical myelopathy: an independent matched cohort analysis. Spine. 2001;26:1330–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Yang L, Gu Y, Shi J, et al. Modified plate-only open-door laminoplasty versus laminectomy and fusion for the treatment of cervical stenotic myelopathy. Orthopedics. 2013;36:e79–87.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Kawai S, Sunago K, Doi K, et al. Cervical laminoplasty (Hattori’s method). Procedure and follow-up results. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1988;13:1245–50.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Hirabayashi K, Satomi K. Operative procedure and results of expansive open-door laminoplasty. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1988;13:870–6.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Hirabayashi K, Watanabe K, Wakano K, et al. Expansive open-door laminoplasty for cervical spinal stenotic myelopathy. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1983;8:693–9.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Tomita K, Kawahara N, Toribatake Y, et al. Expansive midline T-saw laminoplasty (modified spinous process-splitting) for the management of cervical myelopathy. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1998;23:32–7.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Hukuda S, Mochizuki T, Ogata M, et al. Operations for cervical spondylotic myelopathy. A comparison of the results of anterior and posterior procedures. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1985;67:609–15.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Rhee JM, Basra S. Posterior surgery for cervical myelopathy: laminectomy, laminectomy with fusion, and laminoplasty. Asian Spine J. 2008;2:114–26.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Lee JS, Son DW, Lee SH, et al. The predictable factors of the postoperative kyphotic change of sagittal alignment of the cervical spine after the laminoplasty. J Korean Neurosurg Soc. 2017;60:577–83.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Suk KS, Kim KT, Lee JH, et al. Sagittal alignment of the cervical spine after the laminoplasty. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2007;32:E656–60.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Dugoni DE, Mancarella C, Landi A, et al. Post laminoplasty cervical kyphosis-case report. Int J Surg Case Rep. 2014;5:853–7.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Ellwitz J, Roberto R, Gupta M, et al. Patient and surgeon factors associated with postoperative kyphosis after laminoplasty. Evid Based Spine Care J. 2011;2:53–4.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Hosono N, Yonenobu K, Ono K. Neck and shoulder pain after laminoplasty. A noticeable complication. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1996;21:1969–73.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Kawaguchi Y, Matsui H, Ishihara H, et al. Axial symptoms after en bloc cervical laminoplasty. J Spinal Disord. 1999;12:392–5.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Shiraishi T, Fukuda K, Yato Y, et al. Results of skip laminectomy-minimum 2-year follow-up study compared with open-door laminoplasty. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2003;28:2667–72.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Yukawa Y, Kato F, Ito K, et al. Laminoplasty and skip laminectomy for cervical compressive myelopathy: range of motion, postoperative neck pain, and surgical outcomes in a randomized prospective study. Spine. 2007;32:1980–5.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Shiraishi T. Skip laminectomy--a new treatment for cervical spondylotic myelopathy, preserving bilateral muscular attachments to the spinous processes: a preliminary report. Spine J. 2002;2:108–15.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Matsunaga S, Sakou T, Nakanisi K. Analysis of the cervical spine alignment following laminoplasty and laminectomy. Spinal Cord. 1999;37:20–4.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Ishihara A. Roentgenographic studies on the normal pattern of the cervical curvature. Nihon Seikeigeka Gakkai Zasshi. 1968;42:1033–44.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Wright JG, Swiontkowski MF, Heckman JD. Introducing levels of evidence to the journal. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2003;85-A:1–3.Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    West S, King V, Carey TS, et al. Systems to rate the strength of Scientific Evidence. Evidence Report/Technology Assessment No. 47 (Prepared by the Research Triangle Institute–University of North Carolina Evidence-based Practice Center under Contract No. 290-97-0011). AHRQ Publication No. 02-E016. Rockville: Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality; 2002.Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Atkins D, Best D, Briss PA, et al. Grading quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. BMJ. 2004;328:1490.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Balshem H, Helfand M, Schunemann HJ, et al. GRADE guidelines: 3. Rating the quality of evidence. J Clin Epidemiol. 2011;64:401–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Andrews J, Guyatt G, Oxman AD, et al. GRADE guidelines: 14. Going from evidence to recommendations: the significance and presentation of recommendations. J Clin Epidemiol. 2013;66:719–25.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Zhang Y, Coello PA, Guyatt GH, et al. GRADE guidelines: 20. Assessing the certainty of evidence in the importance of outcomes or values and preferences-inconsistency, imprecision, and other domains. J Clin Epidemiol. 2018.
  47. 47.
    Higgins JPT, Cochrane GS. Handbook for systematic reviews of interventions version 5.1.0 [updated March 2011]. The Cochrane Collaboration 2011.
  48. 48.
    Cohen J. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. 2nd ed. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; 1988.Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Borenstein M, Hedges L, Higgins J, Rothstein H. Comprehensive meta-analysis version 3. Englewood: Biostat; 2013.Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Du W, Wang L, Shen Y, et al. Long-term impacts of different posterior operations on curvature, neurological recovery and axial symptoms for multilevel cervical degenerative myelopathy. Eur Spine J. 2013;22:1594–602.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Lee CH, Jahng TA, Hyun SJ, et al. Expansive laminoplasty versus laminectomy alone versus laminectomy and fusion for cervical ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament. J Spinal Disord Tech. 2016;29:E9–E15.Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Chang H, Kim C, Choi BW. Selective laminectomy for cervical spondylotic myelopathy: a comparative analysis with laminoplasty technique. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2017;137:611–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Nurboja B, Kachramanoglou C, Choi D. Cervical laminectomy vs laminoplasty: is there a difference in outcome and postoperative pain. Neurosurgery. 2012;70:965–70; discussion 70PubMedGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Fehlings MG, Santaguida C, Tetreault L, et al. Laminectomy and fusion versus laminoplasty for the treatment of degenerative cervical myelopathy: results from the AOSpine North America and international prospective multicenter studies. Spine J. 2017;17:102–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Highsmith JM, Dhall SS, Haid RW Jr, et al. Treatment of cervical stenotic myelopathy: a cost and outcome comparison of laminoplasty versus laminectomy and lateral mass fusion - clinical article. J Neurosurg Spine. 2011;14:619–25.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Lau D, Winkler EA, Than KD, et al. Laminoplasty versus laminectomy with posterior spinal fusion for multilevel cervical spondylotic myelopathy: influence of cervical alignment on outcomes. J Neurosurg Spine. 2017;27:508–17.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Miyamoto H, Maeno K, Uno K, et al. Outcomes of surgical intervention for cervical spondylotic myelopathy accompanying local kyphosis (comparison between laminoplasty alone and posterior reconstruction surgery using the screw-rod system). Eur Spine J. 2014;23:341–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Stephens BF, Rhee JM, Neustein TM, et al. Laminoplasty does not lead to worsening axial neck pain in the properly selected patient with cervical myelopathy. Spine. 2017;42:1844–50.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Woods BI, Hohl J, Lee J, et al. Laminoplasty versus laminectomy and fusion for multilevel cervical spondylotic myelopathy. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2011;469:688–95.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Yuan W, Zhu Y, Liu X, et al. Postoperative three-dimensional cervical range of motion and neurological outcomes in patients with cervical ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament: cervical laminoplasty versus laminectomy with fusion. Clin Neurol Neurosurg. 2015;134:17–23.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Yehya A. The clinical outcome of lateral mass fixation after decompressive laminectomy in cervical spondylotic myelopathy. Alex J Med. 2015;51:153–9.Google Scholar
  62. 62.
    Della Pepa GM, Roselli R, La Rocca G, et al. Laminoplasty is better of laminectomy in cervical stenotic myelopathy: myth or truth? Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci. 2014;18:50–4.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Lee SH, Suk KS, Kang KC, et al. Outcomes and related factors of C5 palsy following cervical laminectomy with instrumented fusion compared with laminoplasty. Spine. 2016;41:E574–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Fehlings MG, Tetreault LA, Riew KD, et al. A clinical practice guideline for the management of degenerative cervical myelopathy: introduction, rationale, and scope. Global Spine J. 2017;7:21S–7S.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Tetreault LA, Karadimas S, Wilson JR, et al. The natural history of degenerative cervical myelopathy and the rate of hospitalization following spinal cord injury: an updated systematic review. Global Spine J. 2017;7:28S–34S.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Rhee J, Tetreault LA, Chapman JR, et al. Nonoperative versus operative management for the treatment degenerative cervical myelopathy: an updated systematic review. Global Spine J. 2017;7:35S–41S.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Fehlings MG, Tetreault LA, Kurpad S, et al. Change in functional impairment, disability, and quality of life following operative treatment for degenerative cervical myelopathy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Global Spine J. 2017;7:53S–69S.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Tetreault LA, Rhee J, Prather H, et al. Change in function, pain, and quality of life following structured nonoperative treatment in patients with degenerative cervical myelopathy: a systematic review. Global Spine J. 2017;7:42S–52S.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    Fehlings MG, Tetreault LA, Riew KD, et al. A clinical practice guideline for the management of patients with degenerative cervical myelopathy: recommendations for patients with mild, moderate, and severe disease and nonmyelopathic patients with evidence of cord compression. Global Spine J. 2017;7:70S–83S.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Huang RC, Girardi FP, Poynton AR, et al. Treatment of multilevel cervical spondylotic myeloradiculopathy with posterior decompression and fusion with lateral mass plate fixation and local bone graft. J Spinal Disord Tech. 2003;16:123–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Yamanaka K, Tachibana T, Moriyama T, et al. C-5 palsy after cervical laminoplasty with instrumented posterior fusion: clinical article. J Neurosurg Spine. 2014;20:1–4.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Takemitsu M, Cheung KM, Wong YW, et al. C5 nerve root palsy after cervical laminoplasty and posterior fusion with instrumentation. J Spinal Disord Tech. 2008;21:267–72.PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Fan Jiang
    • 1
  • Hiroyuki Katoh
    • 2
    • 3
  • Kazuya Yokota
    • 2
    • 4
  • Michael G. Fehlings
    • 1
    • 5
    Email author
  1. 1.Division of NeurosurgeryToronto Western Hospital, University Health NetworkTorontoCanada
  2. 2.Division of Genetics and DevelopmentKrembil Research Institute, University Health NetworkTorontoCanada
  3. 3.Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Surgical ScienceTokai University School of MedicineIseharaJapan
  4. 4.Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Graduate School of Medical SciencesKyushu UniversityFukokaJapan
  5. 5.Department of SurgeryUniversity of TorontoTorontoCanada

Personalised recommendations