SpineUniverse Case Study Library

Cervical Spondylosis with Myelopathy

History

The patient is a 68-year-old male with a several-month history of progressive gait difficulty, neck and bilateral arm pain, and difficulty with fine motor function.

Examination

The neurological exam found:

  • Slight spastic gait
  • Diffuse 4+/5 weakness in all extremities
  • Brisk DTR's
  • Babinski response present bilaterally

Images

cervical T1-weighted sagittal MRIFigure 1: T1-weighted sagittal MRI

T2-weighted sagittal MRI (Fig. 2) demonstrating multi-level epidural encroachment due to osteophyte formation. There is also a high signal in the spinal cord at the C3-C4 level.

T2-weighted sagittal MRI demonstrating multi-level epidural encroachment due to osteophyte formationFigure 2

sagittal and axial views at C3-C4Figure 3: Sagittal and axial views at C3-C4

sagittal and axial views of C4-C5 demonstrating prominent anterior encroachmentFigure 4: Sagittal and axial views of C4-C5 demonstrating prominent anterior encroachment

sagittal and axial views of C5-C6Figure 5: Sagittal and axial views of C5-C6

sagittal and axial view of C6-C7Figure 6: Sagittal and axial views of C6-C7

Diagnosis

Cervical spondylosis with myelopathy

Suggest Treatment

Indicate how you would treat this patient by completing the following brief survey. Your response will be added to our survey results below.

Selected Treatment

Anterior multi-level discectomy with fixation and fusion was performed on this patient. It was decided to use an anterior-only approach because most of the compression was in front of the spinal cord, particularly at the C4-C5 level. A corpectomy was not performed because most of the epidural compression was at the level of the disc space only. Leaving the vertebrae in place also allows for additional points of screw fixation.

Outcome

The patient did well and reported significant improvement of his symptoms.

One year post-operative AP radiograph (Fig. 7) demonstrated anterior fixation at C3-C4, C4-C5, and C5-C6 disc spaces.

One year post-operative AP radiograph demonstrates anterior fixation at C3-C4, C4-C5, and C5-C6 disc spacesFigure 7

one year post-operative lateral radiographFigure 8: One year post-operative lateral radiograph

Case Discussion

This interesting case of cervical stenotic myelopathy has several potential treatments. There is no "right or wrong" answer for this case. Surgeons may choose to decompress the cervical spine anteriorly, posteriorly, or circumferentially.

One imaging modality that was not employed in this case is a pre-operative cervical CT scan. I might have requested one in this case to see if there was any calcification of the disc spaces or ossified posterior longitudinal ligament (OPLL). With significant calcification ventrally (OPLL), I might try a multi-level posterior decompressive procedure with either a laminoplasty or a laminectomy and fusion as a first step. If going dorsally, I would favor decompression of C3-C7 with a laminoplasty. A laminoplasty would allow for some maintenance of neck motion and allows the construct to stop at C7. The drawback with an open-door laminoplasty is that it is relatively straightforward to do ipsilateral foraminal decompression with foraminotomies on the open side of the laminoplasty, but the contralateral foraminal decompression may be difficult.

A laminectomy and fusion, on the other hand, would allow excellent access to do multi-level bilateral foraminotomies. The issue with a laminectomy and fusion is the caudal ending point. Should the surgeon stop at C6 when there is early foraminal compromise at C6-C7? Or should the construct extend inferiorly to C7 or cross the cervicothoracic junction and extend to T1 or T2? Stopping at C6 may predispose the patient to have to return for surgery at C6-C7 at a later date. Extending the fusion across the cervicothoracic junction would be more morbid to the cervicothoracic musculature.

If the CT scan demonstrated cervical spondylosis with uncalcified, herniated discs or mildly calcified herniated discs, then a ventral approach is ideal. The ventral approach allows for direct decompression of the anterior cord. Multi-level discectomies and fusion may be performed from C3-C6 or C3-C7. If there is a calcified component of the herniated discs, then a partial corpectomy or a full corpectomy of C4 may be considered.

I would not employ a combined ventral and dorsal approach for this case. I would try either a ventral or a dorsal approach first. Then I would observe the patient. If the patient's neurological recovery is not satisfactory, then a second stage operation could be performed for further decompression.

The surgeon's choice of performing a multi-level discectomy from C3-C6 worked well in this case. It allowed for ventral decompression and fixation of the most severely compressed levels. The patient needs to be followed to ensure that the C6-C7 level does not need to be treated later.

Author's Response

Doctor Mummaneni correctly points out that there are several acceptable surgical options for the management of this patient. The predominance of ventral epidural compression and the location of this compression, primarily at the level of the disc spaces were the factors that led to my selection of the anterior multi-level discectomy approach. However, with other acceptable surgical options available in a case like this, each surgeon should select the approach that he or she feels works best in their hands.

Case Discussion

This patient presented with cervical myelopathy and was found to have multi-level cervical stenosis on magnetic resonance imaging. A 3-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion resulted in stabilization of the myelopathy with solid fusion that was evident on radiographs at 1-year follow-up.

In addition to decompression of the spinal canal, advantages of an anterior approach in this case include the ability to restore cervical lordosis and decompress the neuroforamen. The patient did have bilateral arm pain, which could have been a component of the myelopathy, but also could have represented a myeloradiculopathy, given the multi-level neuroforaminal stenosis that is present. Accordingly, neuroforaminal decompression was necessary to address this. A posterior approach may have resulted in adequate central canal decompression by allowing the spinal cord to “fall back” off the anterior osteophytes. However, multi-level neuroforaminal decompression from a posterior approach does require resection of a portion of the lateral mass and makes it more difficult to place instrumentation. Although no significant central canal compression was present at C6-C7, there is the presence of bilateral neuroforaminal compression. This level could have been included if a C7 radiculopathy was suspected of contributing to his bilateral arm pain.

Community Case Discussion (1 comment)

SpineUniverse invites spine professionals to share their thoughts on this case.


It is a very nice case and the outcome is satisfactory for the patient. However with cervical fusion we have to looking for adjacent segment diseases specially after multisegment fusion. I have 20 cases with Degenerative cervical canal stenosis and myelopathy, all of them treated by posterior laminectomy and lateral mass fixation and fusion. The longest segment we did (from C3-C6)recure after 6 years by quadriparesis and adjacent segment tight canal stenosis and myelopathy which treated by the same procedures with extension of fusion to T1. So, laminoplasty may achieve better results for long term follow up as it preserve some movements.

Cancel
Delete

Get new patient cases delivered to your inbox

Sign up for our healthcare professional eNewsletter, SpineMonitor.
Sign Up!