All‐Level Versus Alternative‐Level in Unilateral Laminoplasty: A Retrospective Comparative Study

ABSTRACT Objective Titanium mini‐plates are applied in unilateral open‐door laminoplasty to secure the elevated laminae and prevent re‐closure. Whereas the conventional technique fixates every level, some surgeons plate only alternate levels to curb implant costs. Whether they could achieve similar...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Bin Zheng, Zhenqi Zhu, Yan Liang, Haiying Liu
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Wiley 2025-07-01
Series:Orthopaedic Surgery
Subjects:
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1111/os.70100
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1849423381505507328
author Bin Zheng
Zhenqi Zhu
Yan Liang
Haiying Liu
author_facet Bin Zheng
Zhenqi Zhu
Yan Liang
Haiying Liu
author_sort Bin Zheng
collection DOAJ
description ABSTRACT Objective Titanium mini‐plates are applied in unilateral open‐door laminoplasty to secure the elevated laminae and prevent re‐closure. Whereas the conventional technique fixates every level, some surgeons plate only alternate levels to curb implant costs. Whether they could achieve similar long‐term clinical and radiographic efficacy is still questionable. This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of alternative‐level fixation versus all‐level fixation in cervical laminoplasty for multilevel cervical spondylotic myelopathy (CSM). Methods A retrospective analysis is conducted on 65 patients who underwent C3–C7 unilateral laminoplasty at Peking University People's Hospital from July 2012 to December 2020. Patients are divided into two groups: alternative‐level fixation and all‐level fixation. Clinical outcomes, including operative time, intraoperative blood loss, postoperative hospitalization days, and complications, are assessed. The Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) score is used for neurological function evaluation, while pain is assessed with the Visual Analog Scale (VAS). Radiographic outcomes include changes in anterior–posterior diameter, Pavlov ratio, cervical lordosis (CL), thoracic slope (T1S), and sagittal vertical axis (SVA). Results Both groups showed significant improvements in JOA (15.94 ± 0.85 vs. 8.74 ± 1.76 in alternative‐level and 16.1 ± 0.79 vs. 8.42 ± 1.84 in all‐level) and VAS (1.03 ± 0.87 vs. 5.79 ± 1.18 in alternative‐level, 1.06 ± 0.77 vs. 5.35 ± 1.17 in all‐level) postoperatively, with no statistically significant differences in clinical outcomes between the groups (JOA: 15.94 ± 0.85 vs. 16.1 ± 0.79, p = 0.394; VAS: 1.03 ± 0.87 vs. 1.06 ± 0.77, p = 0.432). Although total hospital costs are significantly lower in the alternative‐level fixation group (124,937 ± 5104.01 RMB vs. 88007.53 ± 7014.53, p < 0.001), the all‐level fixation group demonstrated better long‐term preservation of APD (17.87 ± 0.60 vs. 17.50 ± 0.52) at the final follow‐up. Radiographic outcomes, including CL, T1s, and cSVA, show no significant differences between the two groups, indicating comparable spinal alignment outcomes. Conclusion Both all‐level and alternative‐level fixation methods effectively support the lamina and prevent reclosure, with significant improvement in clinical symptoms in both groups at the final follow‐up, showing no significant difference in postoperative clinical outcomes between the two. There are no differences in sagittal parameters. All‐level fixation method showed better preservation of the spinal canal diameter.
format Article
id doaj-art-db963655411b4327b0f7d2d4d8dcd2ac
institution Kabale University
issn 1757-7853
1757-7861
language English
publishDate 2025-07-01
publisher Wiley
record_format Article
series Orthopaedic Surgery
spelling doaj-art-db963655411b4327b0f7d2d4d8dcd2ac2025-08-20T03:30:36ZengWileyOrthopaedic Surgery1757-78531757-78612025-07-011772141214910.1111/os.70100All‐Level Versus Alternative‐Level in Unilateral Laminoplasty: A Retrospective Comparative StudyBin Zheng0Zhenqi Zhu1Yan Liang2Haiying Liu3Spine Surgery Peking University People's Hospital Beijing ChinaSpine Surgery Peking University People's Hospital Beijing ChinaSpine Surgery Peking University People's Hospital Beijing ChinaSpine Surgery Peking University People's Hospital Beijing ChinaABSTRACT Objective Titanium mini‐plates are applied in unilateral open‐door laminoplasty to secure the elevated laminae and prevent re‐closure. Whereas the conventional technique fixates every level, some surgeons plate only alternate levels to curb implant costs. Whether they could achieve similar long‐term clinical and radiographic efficacy is still questionable. This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of alternative‐level fixation versus all‐level fixation in cervical laminoplasty for multilevel cervical spondylotic myelopathy (CSM). Methods A retrospective analysis is conducted on 65 patients who underwent C3–C7 unilateral laminoplasty at Peking University People's Hospital from July 2012 to December 2020. Patients are divided into two groups: alternative‐level fixation and all‐level fixation. Clinical outcomes, including operative time, intraoperative blood loss, postoperative hospitalization days, and complications, are assessed. The Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) score is used for neurological function evaluation, while pain is assessed with the Visual Analog Scale (VAS). Radiographic outcomes include changes in anterior–posterior diameter, Pavlov ratio, cervical lordosis (CL), thoracic slope (T1S), and sagittal vertical axis (SVA). Results Both groups showed significant improvements in JOA (15.94 ± 0.85 vs. 8.74 ± 1.76 in alternative‐level and 16.1 ± 0.79 vs. 8.42 ± 1.84 in all‐level) and VAS (1.03 ± 0.87 vs. 5.79 ± 1.18 in alternative‐level, 1.06 ± 0.77 vs. 5.35 ± 1.17 in all‐level) postoperatively, with no statistically significant differences in clinical outcomes between the groups (JOA: 15.94 ± 0.85 vs. 16.1 ± 0.79, p = 0.394; VAS: 1.03 ± 0.87 vs. 1.06 ± 0.77, p = 0.432). Although total hospital costs are significantly lower in the alternative‐level fixation group (124,937 ± 5104.01 RMB vs. 88007.53 ± 7014.53, p < 0.001), the all‐level fixation group demonstrated better long‐term preservation of APD (17.87 ± 0.60 vs. 17.50 ± 0.52) at the final follow‐up. Radiographic outcomes, including CL, T1s, and cSVA, show no significant differences between the two groups, indicating comparable spinal alignment outcomes. Conclusion Both all‐level and alternative‐level fixation methods effectively support the lamina and prevent reclosure, with significant improvement in clinical symptoms in both groups at the final follow‐up, showing no significant difference in postoperative clinical outcomes between the two. There are no differences in sagittal parameters. All‐level fixation method showed better preservation of the spinal canal diameter.https://doi.org/10.1111/os.70100all‐levelalternative‐levelanterior–posterior diametercervical spondylotic myelopathylaminoplasty
spellingShingle Bin Zheng
Zhenqi Zhu
Yan Liang
Haiying Liu
All‐Level Versus Alternative‐Level in Unilateral Laminoplasty: A Retrospective Comparative Study
Orthopaedic Surgery
all‐level
alternative‐level
anterior–posterior diameter
cervical spondylotic myelopathy
laminoplasty
title All‐Level Versus Alternative‐Level in Unilateral Laminoplasty: A Retrospective Comparative Study
title_full All‐Level Versus Alternative‐Level in Unilateral Laminoplasty: A Retrospective Comparative Study
title_fullStr All‐Level Versus Alternative‐Level in Unilateral Laminoplasty: A Retrospective Comparative Study
title_full_unstemmed All‐Level Versus Alternative‐Level in Unilateral Laminoplasty: A Retrospective Comparative Study
title_short All‐Level Versus Alternative‐Level in Unilateral Laminoplasty: A Retrospective Comparative Study
title_sort all level versus alternative level in unilateral laminoplasty a retrospective comparative study
topic all‐level
alternative‐level
anterior–posterior diameter
cervical spondylotic myelopathy
laminoplasty
url https://doi.org/10.1111/os.70100
work_keys_str_mv AT binzheng alllevelversusalternativelevelinunilaterallaminoplastyaretrospectivecomparativestudy
AT zhenqizhu alllevelversusalternativelevelinunilaterallaminoplastyaretrospectivecomparativestudy
AT yanliang alllevelversusalternativelevelinunilaterallaminoplastyaretrospectivecomparativestudy
AT haiyingliu alllevelversusalternativelevelinunilaterallaminoplastyaretrospectivecomparativestudy