Advertisement

Posterior Laminoforaminotomy for Radiculopathy

  • James S. HarropEmail author
  • John L. Gillick
Chapter

Abstract

Cervical spondylosis is a commonly encountered degenerative condition and represents one of the most frequently treated diagnoses in neurosurgery. Its prevalence has recently been demonstrated as 89.7% in patients with a mean age of 56.4. Additionally, these patients may have more severe symptoms from nerve root or spinal cord compression, resulting in radicular pain or myelopathy, possibly causing a neurological deficit. Posterior cervical laminoforaminotomy (PCLF) was first described by Spurling and Scoville in 1944 and represents a safe and effective surgical technique by which to treat cervical radiculopathy in patients who have failed conservative therapy. The aim of this chapter is to describe the indications, contraindications, techniques, and complications of PCLF while providing a review of the current literature regarding this approach.

Keywords

Posterior laminoforaminotomy Radiculopathy PCLF Cervical spondylosis Cervical radiculopathy Compression Microendoscopic foraminotomy MEF 

References

  1. 1.
    Nouri A, Martin A, Tetreault L, Nater A, Kato S, Nakashima H, Nagoshi N, Reihani-Kermani H, Fehlings MG. MRI analysis of the combined prospectively collected AOSpine North America and International Data: the prevalence and spectrum of pathologies in a global cohort of patients with degenerative cervical myelopathy. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2017;42(14):1058–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Hult L. The Munkfors investigation; a study of the frequency and causes of the stiff neck-brachialgia and lumbago-sciatica syndromes, as well as observations on certain signs and symptoms from the dorsal spine and the joints of the extremities in industrial and forest workers. Acta Orthop Scan Suppl. 1954;16:1–76.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Spurling RG, Scoville WB. Lateral rupture of the cervical intervertebral disks: a common cause of shoulder and arm pain. Surg Gynecol Obstet. 1944;78:350–8.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Lees F, Turner JW. Natural history and prognosis of cervical spondylosis. Br Med J. 1963;2(5373):1607–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Radhakrishnan K, Litchy WJ, O’Fallon WM, Kurland LT. Epidemiology of cervical radiculopathy. A population-based study from Rochester, Minnesota, 1976 through 1990. Brain. 1994;117(Pt 2):325–35.  https://doi.org/10.1093/brain/117.2.325.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Iyer S, Kim HJ. Cervical radiculopathy. Cur Rev Musculoskelet Med. 2016;9(3):272–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Wong JJ, Cote P, Quesnele JJ, Stern PJ, Mior SA. The course and prognostic factors of symptomatic cervical disc herniation with radiculopathy: a systematic review of the literature. Spine J. 2014;14:1781–9.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spinee.2014.02.032.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Saal JS, Saal JA, Yurth EF. Nonoperative management of herniated cervical intervertebral disc with radiculopathy. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1996;21(16):1877–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Dodwad SJ, Dodwad SN, Prasam ML, Savage JW, Patel AA, Hsu WK. Posterior cervical foraminotomy: indications, technique, and outcomes. Clin Spine Surg. 2016;29(5):177–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Church EW, Halpern CH, Faught RW, Balmuri U, Attiah MA, Hayden S, Kerr M, Maloney-Wilensky E, Bynum J, Dante SJ, Welch WC, Simeone FA. Cervical laminoforaminotomy for radiculopathy: symptomatic functional outcomes in a large cohort with long-term follow-up. Surg Neurol Int. 2014;5(Suppl 15):S536–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Woods BI, Hilibrand AS. Cervical radiculopathy: epidemiology, etiology, diagnosis, and treatment. J Spinal Disord Tech. 2015;28:E251–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Albert TJ, Murrell SE. Surgical management of cervical radiculopathy. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 1999;7:368–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Skovrlj B, Gologorsky Y, Haque R, Fessler RG, Qureshi SA. Complications, outcomes, and need for fusion after minimally invasive posterior cervical foraminotomy and microdiscectomy. Spine J. 2014;14(10):2405–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Zbeblick TA, Abitbol JJ, Kunz DN, McCabe RP, Garfin S. Cervical stability after sequential capsule resection. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1993;18(14):2005–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Jagannathan J, Sherman JH, Szabo T, Shaffrey CI, Jane JA. The posterior cervical foraminotomy in the treatment of cervical disc/osteophyte disease: a single-surgeon experience with a minimum of 5 years’ clinical radiographic follow-up. J Neurosurg Spine. 2009;10:347–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Bydon M, Mathios D, Macki M, de la Garza-Ramos R, Sciubba DM, Witham TF, Wolinsky JP, Gokasalan ZL, Bydon A. Long-term patient outcomes after posterior cervical foraminotomy: an analysis of 151 cases. J Neurosurg Spine. 2014;21(5):727–31.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Zeidman SM, Ducker TB. Posterior cervical laminoforaminotomy for radiculopathy: review of 172 cases. Neurosurgery. 1993;33(3):356–62.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Fessler RG, Khoo LT. Minimally invasive cervical microendoscopic foraminotomy: an initial clinical experience. Neurosurgery. 2002;51(5 Suppl):S37–45.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Clark JG, Abdullah KG, Steinmetz MP, Benzel EC, Mroz TE. Minimally invasive versus open cervical foraminotomy: a systematic review. Global Spine J. 2011;1(1):9–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Tumialán LM, Ponton RP, Gluf WM. Management of unilateral cervical radiculopathy in the military: the cost effectiveness of posterior cervical foraminotomy compared with anterior cervical discectomy and fusion. Neurosurg Focus. 2010;28(5):E17.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Henderson CM, Hennessy RG, Shuey HM, Shackelford EG. Posterior-lateral foraminotomy as an exclusive operative technique for cervical radiculopathy: a review of 846 consecutively operated cases. Neurosurgery. 1983;13(5):504–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Kumar GR, Maurice-Williams RS, Bradford R. Cervical foraminotomy: an effective treatment for cervical spondylotic radiculopathy. Br J Neurosurg. 1998;12(6):563–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Hilibrand AS, Carlson GD, Palumbo MA, Jones PK, Bohlman HH. Radiculopathy and myelopathy at segments adjacent to the site of a pervious anterior cervical arthrodesis. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1999;81(4):519–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Clarke MJ, Ecker RD, Krauss WE, McClelland RL, Dekutoski MB. Same-segment and adjacent-segment disease following posterior cervical foraminotomy. J Neurosurg Spine. 2007;6(1):5–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Neurological and Orthopedic Surgery, Division of Spine and Peripheral Nerve Surgery, Delaware Valley SCI CenterThomas Jefferson UniversityPhiladelphiaUSA
  2. 2.Department of NeurosurgeryThomas Jefferson UniversityPhiladelphiaUSA
  3. 3.Department of NeurosurgeryRutgers-New Jersey Medical SchoolNewarkUSA

Personalised recommendations