Clinical and radiological efficacy of corpectomy and anterior stabilization with titanium mesh cages in patients with myelopathic syndrome associated with cervical spine degenerative di

The aim of this study was to research the clinical and radiological efficacy of  corpectomy and anterior stabilization with titanium mesh cages in patients with myelopathic syndrome associated with cervical spine degenerative diseases.

Material and methods. A retrospective observational cohort study was performed. The study included medical records of patients with cervical myelopathy associated with degenerative diseases of the cervical spine who underwent corpectomy and  anterior stabilization with titanium mesh cages. Clinical and instrumental parameters were assessed.

Results. The study included 28  medical records of respondents who underwent corpectomy and anterior stabilization with titanium mesh implants. The average age of patients was 61.9 ± 11.3 years, males prevailed (60.7 %). By the 3rd month of  postoperative follow-up, the severity of myelopathy significantly decreased (p˂0.001). After 12  months, the severity of cervical myelopathic syndrome also significantly decreased (p = 0.009). The neurological status of 18 (64.2 %) respondents improved in the first 3  months after corpectomy and anterior stabilization with titanium mesh implants and 6 months after the surgery, the status improved in the remaining 8 (30.7 %) patients (p˂0.001). Preoperative values of the Cobb sagittal angle allowed us to conclude the following. In 13 (46.4 %) patients, the normolordotic axis of the cervical spine was noted, in 12  (42.8  %) – the  hypolordotic axis, and in 3 (10.8 %) respondents, the Cobb angle values corresponded to the kyphotic axis of the cervical spine.

Conclusion. The technique of corpectomy and anterior fixation with mesh titanium implants in patients with myelopathic syndrome against the background of  degenerative diseases of the cervical spine makes it possible to improve the clinical status of the latter already 3 months after the operation was performed while maintaining normal biomechanical parameters of the cervical spine and complete decompression of the neural structures and supply their vessels. 

1. Sasaki M, Asamoto S, Umegaki M, Matsumoto K. Cervical osteogenic degeneration in Japanese professional wrestlers and its relationship to cervical spine injury. J Neurosurg Spine. 2018; 29(6): 622-627. doi: 10.3171/2018.5.SPINE18283

2. Steinberger J, Qureshi S. Cervical disc replacement. Neurosurg Clin N Am. 2020; 31(1): 73-79. doi: 10.1016/j.nec.2019.08.009

3. Nouri A, Tetreault L, Singh A, Karadimas SK, Fehlings MG. Degenerative cervical myelopathy: Epidemiology, genetics, and pathogenesis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2015; 40(12): E675-E693. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000000913

4. Byvaltsev VA, Kalinin AA, Aliev MA, Shepelev VV, Yusupov BR, Aglakov BM. A meta-analysis of prospective studies comparing the results of laminoplasty and laminectomy with instrumental fixation in the surgical treatment of patients with multilevel degenerative cervical spine diseases. Annals of the Russian Academy of Medical Sciences. 2020; 75(1): 54-68. (In Russ.). doi: 10.15690/vramn1160

5. Alam I, Sharma R, Borkar SA, Goda R, Katiyar V, Kale SS. Factors predicting loss of cervical lordosis following cervical laminoplasty: A critical review. J Craniovertebr Junction Spine. 2020; 11(3): 163-168. doi: 10.4103/jcvjs.JCVJS_70_20

6. Pescatori L, Tropeano MP, Visocchi M, Grasso G, Ciappetta P. Cervical spondylotic myelopathy: When and why the cervical corpectomy? World Neurosurg. 2020; 140: 548-555. doi: 10.1016/j.wneu.2020.03.100

7. Chen Z, Yu H, Song C, Zhang L, Wu J, Xiao L, et al. Clinical outcomes of posterior laminectomy and pedicle screw fixation for upper cervical intraspinal tumors: A case series. J Int Med Res. 2020; 48(10): 300060520960318. doi: 10.1177/0300060520960318

8. He X, Zhang JN, Liu TJ, Hao DJ. Is laminectomy and fusion the better choice than laminoplasty for multilevel cervical myelopathy with signal changes on magnetic resonance imaging? A comparison of two posterior surgeries. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2020; 21(1): 423. doi: 10.1186/s12891-020-03435-7

9. Kotter MRN, Tetreault L, Badhiwala JH, Wilson JR, Arnold PM, Bartels R, et al. Surgical outcomes following laminectomy with fusion versus laminectomy alone in patients with degenerative cervical myelopathy. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2020; 45(24): 1696-1703. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000003677

10. Mesregah MK, Buchanan IA, Formanek B, Wang JC, Buser Z. Intra- and post-complications of cervical laminoplasty for the treatment of cervical myelopathy: An analysis of a nationwide database. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2020; 45(20): E1302-E1311. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000003574

11. Abe T, Miyazaki M, Ishihara T, Kanezaki S, Notani N, Kataoka M, et al. Analysis of the risk factors for increasing cervical sagittal vertical axis after cervical laminoplasty for cervical spondylotic myelopathy. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2020 Oct 30. doi: 10.1007/s00402-020-03667-1

12. Ha Y, Shin JJ. Comparison of clinical and radiological outcomes in cervical laminoplasty versus laminectomy with fusion in patients with ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament. Neurosurg Rev. 2020; 43(5): 1409-1421. doi: 10.1007/s10143-019-01174-5

13. Zhou P, Zong L, Wu Q, Ye Y, Zhang Z, Yang H, et al. Analysis of Cervical Sagittal Balance in Treating Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy: 1-Level Anterior Cervical Corpectomy and Fusion Versus 2-Level Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion. Med Sci Monit. 2020; 26:e923748. Published 2020 Jul 29. doi:10.12659/MSM.923748

14. Wei F, Xu N, Li Z, Cai H, Zhou F, Yang J, et al. A prospective randomized cohort study on 3D-printed artificial vertebral body in single-level anterior cervical corpectomy for cervical spondylotic myelopathy. Ann Transl Med. 2020; 8(17): 1070. doi: 10.21037/atm-19-4719

15. Ji H, Xie X, Zhuang S, Zhang C, Xie L, Wu X. Comparative analysis of three types of titanium mesh cages for anterior cervical single-level corpectomy and fusion in term of postoperative subsidence. Am J Transl Res. 2020; 12(10): 6569-6577

16. von Elm E, Altman DG, Egger M, Pocock SJ, Gøtzsche PC, Vandenbroucke JP; STROBE Initiative. The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: Guidelines for reporting observational studies. J Clin Epidemiol. 2008; 61(4): 344-349. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2007.11.008

17. World Medical Association. World Medical Association Declaration of Helsinki: Ethical principles for medical research involving human subjects. JAMA. 2013; 310(20): 2191-2194. doi: 10.1001/jama.2013.281053

18. Davies BM, Mowforth OD, Smith EK, Kotter MR. Degenerative cervical myelopathy. BMJ. 2018; 360: k186. doi: 10.1136/bmj.k186

19. Badhiwala JH, Ahuja CS, Akbar MA, Witiw CD, Nassiri F, Furlan JC, et al. Degenerative cervical myelopathy – update and future directions. Nat Rev Neurol. 2020; 16(2): 108-124. doi: 10.1038/s41582-019-0303-0

20. Desmoulin GT, Pradhan V, Milner TE. Mechanical aspects of intervertebral disc injury and implications on biomechanics. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2020; 45(8): E457-E464. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000003291

21. Skoromets AA, Skoromets AP, Skoromets TA, Afanasiev VV. Vascular diseases of the spinal cord. Moscow: Politekhnika; 2007. (In Russ.).

22. Novy J. Spinal cord syndromes. Front Neurol Neurosci. 2012; 30: 195-198. doi: 10.1159/000333682

23. Skoromets AA, Skoromets AP, Skoromets TA. Nervous diseases. Moscow: Medpress-inform; 2017. (In Russ.).

24. Kumar VG, Rea GL, Mervis LJ, McGregor JM. Cervical spondylotic myelopathy: Functional and radiographic long-term outcome after laminectomy and posterior fusion. Neurosurgery. 1999; 44(4): 771-778. doi: 10.1097/00006123-199904000-00046

25. Heller JG, Edwards CC 2nd, Murakami H, Rodts GE. Laminoplasty versus laminectomy and fusion for multilevel cervical myelopathy: An independent matched cohort analysis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2001; 26(12): 1330-1336. doi: 10.1097/00007632-200106150-00013

26. Zeng J, Duan Y, Yang Y, Wang B, Hong Y, Lou J, et al. Anterior corpectomy and reconstruction using dynamic cervical plate and titanium mesh cage for cervical spondylotic myelopathy: A minimum 5-year follow-up study. Medicine (Baltimore). 2018; 97(5): e9724. doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000009724

27. Wada E, Suzuki S, Kanazawa A, Matsuoka T, Miyamoto S, Yonenobu K. Subtotal corpectomy versus laminoplasty for multilevel cervical spondylotic myelopathy: A long-term follow-up study over 10 years. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2001; 26(13): 1443-1448. doi: 10.1097/00007632-200107010-00011

28. Yonenobu K, Fuji T, Ono K, Okada K, Yamamoto T, Harada N. Choice of surgical treatment for multisegmental cervical spondylotic myelopathy. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1985; 10(8): 710-716. doi: 10.1097/00007632-198510000-00004

29. Sevki K, Mehmet T, Ufuk T, Azmi H, Mercan S, Erkal B. Results of surgical treatment for degenerative cervical myelopathy: Anterior cervical corpectomy and stabilization. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2004; 29(22): 2493-2500. doi: 10.1097/01.brs.0000145412.93407.c3

30. Tasiou A, Giannis T, Brotis AG, Siasios I, Georgiadis I, Gatos H, et al. Anterior cervical spine surgery-associated complications in a retrospective case-control study. J Spine Surg. 2017; 3(3): 444-459. doi: 10.21037/jss.2017.08.03

31. Macdonald RL, Fehlings MG, Tator CH, Lozano A, Fleming JR, Gentili F, et al. Multilevel anterior cervical corpectomy and fibular allograft fusion for cervical myelopathy. J Neurosurg. 1997; 86(6): 990-997. doi: 10.3171/jns.1997.86.6.0990