Dataset Information

The Relative Merits of Posterior Surgical Treatments for Multi-Level Degenerative Cervical Myelopathy Remain Uncertain: Findings from a Systematic Review.

ABSTRACT:

Objectives

To assess the reporting of study design and characteristics in multi-level degenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM) treated by posterior surgical approaches, and perform a comparison of clinical and radiographic outcomes between different approaches.

Methods

A literature search was performed in Embase and MEDLINE between 1995-2019 using a sensitive search string combination. Studies were selected by predefined selection criteria: Full text articles in English, with >10 patients (prospective) or >50 patients (retrospective), reporting outcomes of multi-level DCM treated by posterior surgical approach.

Results

A total of 75 studies involving 19,510 patients, conducted worldwide, were identified. Laminoplasty was described in 56 studies (75%), followed by laminectomy with (36%) and without fusion (16%). The majority of studies were conducted in Asia (84%), in the period of 2016-2019 (51%), of which laminoplasty was studied predominantly. Twelve (16%) prospective studies and 63 (84%) retrospective studies were identified. The vast majority of studies were conducted in a single centre (95%) with clear inclusion/exclusion criteria and explicit cause of DCM. Eleven studies (15%) included patients with ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament exclusively with cohorts of 57 to 252. The clinical and radiographic outcomes were reported with heterogeneity when comparing laminoplasty, laminectomy with and without fusion.

Conclusions

Heterogeneity in the reporting of study and sample characteristics exists, as well as in clinical and radiographic outcomes, with a paucity of studies with a higher level of evidence. Future studies are needed to elucidate the clinical effectiveness of posterior surgical treatments.

SUBMITTER: Yang X

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8397218 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Study designA prospective observational international study.ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to evaluate outcomes of decompressive surgery in patients with very severe degenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM).Summary of background dataAlthough decompressive surgery has been evidenced as a safe and effective approach for patients with myelopathic deficiencies, studies have suggested residual disability following treatment in patients with more severe disease presentation.MethodsPostoperative outcomes of 60 patients with very severe DCM (modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association [mJOA] score ≤8) were compared to outcomes of 188 patients with severe DCM (mJOA 9-11). Postimputation follow-up rate was 93.1%. Unadjusted and adjusted analyses were performed using two-way repeated measures of covariance.ResultsThe two cohorts were similar in demographics, length of duration of myelopathy symptoms, source of stenosis, and surgical approaches used to decompress the spine. The very severe and severe cohorts differed in preoperative Nurick grades (4.97 vs. 3.91, respectively, P < 0.0001) and Neck Disability Index scores (45.20 vs. 56.21, respectively, P = 0.0006). There were no differences in Short Form 36 (SF-36v2) physical (PCS) and mental (MCS) component summary scores. Both cohorts improved in mJOA, Nurick, Neck Disability Index, and SF-36v2 PCS and MCS scores. Despite the substantial postoperative improvements, patients in both cohorts had considerable residual symptoms. Two-thirds of the patients in the very severe cohort had severe (mJOA ≤11) or moderate (mJOA ≤ 14) myelopathy symptoms at 24 months follow-up. Longer duration of disease was associated with poorer treatment response.ConclusionDecompressive surgery is effective in patients with very severe DCM; however, patients have significant residual symptoms and disability. The very severe subgroup (mJOA ≤8) of patients with DCM represents a distinct group of patients and their different clinical trajectory is important for clinicians and patients to recognize. Duration of symptoms negatively affects chances for recovery. Whenever possible, patients with DCM should be treated before developing very severe symptomatology.Level of evidence2.

Project description:BackgroundDegenerative Cervical Myelopathy (DCM) is one of the most common degenerative disorders of cervical spine and sources of cord dysfunction in adults. It usually manifests with neurologic presentations such as loss of dexterity and gait issues. Treatment for moderate and severe cases of DCM is surgical decompression of the region. There are many approaches available for surgical intervention which could be categorized into anterior and posterior based on the side of neck where operation takes place. Additionally, for certain cases the hybridized anterior-posterior combined surgery is indicated. While there are many technical differences between these approaches with each having its own advantages, the complications and safety profiles of them are not fully disclosed. This protocol aims to systematically search for current reports on complications of surgical decompression methods of DCM and pool them for robust evidence generation.MethodSearch will be carried out in PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane databases for retrospective and prospective surgical series, cohorts, or trials being performed for DCM with at least a sample size of 20 patients. Query strings will be designed to capture reports with details of complications with no year limit. Studies not being original (e.g., review articles, case reports, etc.), not in English, having patients younger than 18-years-old, and not reporting at least one complication will be excluded. Two independent reviewers will review the titles and abstracts for first round of screening. Full text of retrieved studies from previous round will be screened again by the same reviewers. In case of discrepancy, the third senior reviewer will be consulted. Eligible studies will then be examined for data extraction where data will be recorded into standardized form. Cumulative incidence and 95% confidence intervals of complication will be then pooled based on generalized linear mixed models with consideration of approach of surgery as subgroups. Heterogeneity tests will be performed for assessment of risk of bias.DiscussionThis systematic review is aimed at providing practical information for spine surgeons on the rates of complications of different surgical approaches of DCM decompression. Proper decision-making regarding the surgical approach in addition to informing patients could be facilitated through results of this investigation.

Project description:BackgroundDegenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM) is widely accepted as the most common cause of adult myelopathy worldwide. Despite this, there is no specific term or diagnostic criteria in the International Classification of Diseases 11th Revision and no Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) or an equivalent in common literature databases. This makes searching the literature and thus conducting systematic reviews or meta-analyses imprecise and inefficient. Efficient research synthesis is integral to delivering evidence-based medicine and improving research efficiency.ObjectiveThis study aimed to illustrate the difficulties encountered when attempting to carry out a comprehensive and accurate evidence search in the field of DCM by identifying the key sources of imprecision and quantifying their impact.MethodsTo identify the key sources of imprecision and quantify their impact, an illustrative search strategy was developed using a validated DCM hedge combined with contemporary strategies used by authors in previous systematic reviews and meta-analyses. This strategy was applied to Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online (MEDLINE) and Excerpta Medica dataBASE (EMBASE) databases looking for relevant DCM systematic reviews and meta-analyses published within the last 5 years.ResultsThe MEDLINE via PubMed search strategy returned 24,166 results, refined to 534 papers after the application of inclusion and exclusion criteria. Of these, 32.96% (176/534) results were about DCM, and 18.16% (97/534) of these were DCM systematic reviews or meta-analyses. Non-DCM results were organized into imprecision categories (spinal: 268/534, 50.2%; nonspinal: 84/534, 15.5%; and nonhuman: 8/534, 1.5%). The largest categories were spinal cord injury (75/534, 13.67%), spinal neoplasms (44/534, 8.24%), infectious diseases of the spine and central nervous system (18/534, 3.37%), and other spinal levels (ie, thoracic, lumbar, and sacral; 18/534, 3.37%). Counterintuitively, the use of human and adult PubMed filters was found to exclude a large number of relevant articles. Searching a second database (EMBASE) added an extra 12 DCM systematic reviews or meta-analyses.ConclusionsDCM search strategies face significant imprecision, principally because of overlapping and heterogenous search terms, and inaccurate article indexing. Notably, commonly employed MEDLINE filters, human and adult, reduced search sensitivity, whereas the related articles function and the use of a second database (EMBASE) improved it. Development of a MeSH labeling and a standardized DCM definition would allow comprehensive and specific indexing of DCM literature. This is required to support a more efficient research synthesis.