Cervical Myelopathy

Cx stenosis

 

Definition

 

Spinal cord dysfunction caused by extrinsic compression of the cord or its vascular supply

 

Epidemiology

 

Commonest cause of atraumatic spinal cord injury

C5/6 commonest level

 

Pathophysiology

 

A. Congenital / developmental stenosis
 

B. Degenerative

1.  Degeneration - Herniated nucleus pulposis (HNP), osteophytes from facet and uncovertebral joints

2. Instability / spondylolithesis

3. Kyphosis - stretches spinal cord over posterior vertebral bodies and discs

4. Ossification of PLL (OPLL)  - more common in certain Asian populations i.e. Japanese

 

Nouri et al Spine 2017

- MRI of 458 patients with myelopathy

- 90% spondylosis

- 60% enlargement of ligament flavum

- OPLL 10%

- spondylolisthesis 10%

- single level disc pathology 10%

 

History

 

Neck pain

 

Difficulty walking / unsteadiness on feet

 

Weakness

- upper > lower limb

- distal > central

- clumsiness of hands, difficulty with fine motor function

 

Parasthesia - upper limb, global, non dermatomal
 

Bladder dysfunction uncommon

 

Central cord syndrome (boneschool page)

- after an acute injury or fall

- typically hyperextension

- acute flaccid paralysis of upper limbs

 

Examination

 

(boneschool page)

 

Upper motor neuron (UMN) signs below lesion

Lower motor neuron (LMN) signs at level of lesion

 

Ataxia

- wide based gait

- unable to heel toe

 

Poor proprioception
- finger escape sign - deficient adduction or extension of ulnar digits of affected hand

- Rhomberg Positive

 

Hyper-reflexia

- Hoffman Reflex - flexion of ipsilateral IPJ of index and thumb when long finger DIPJ flexed

- Inverted Brachioradialis Reflex - spontaneous flexion of digits when BR reflex elicited
- Babinski Reflex

 

Nurick classification system

 

Grade 0: Signs or symptoms of root involvement but without evidence of spinal cord disease

Grade 1: Signs of spinal cord disease but no difficulty in walking

Grade 2: Slight difficulty in walking, which did not prevent full-time employment

Grade 3: Difficulty in walking preventing fulltime employment / ability to do housework

Grade 4: Able to walk only with someone else’s help or with the aid of a frame

Grade 5: Chair-bound or bedridden

 

DDx
 

Need to exclude other causes of neurological symptoms

- multiple sclerosis / motor neuron disease

- stroke / AVM / tumour / hydrocephalus

- metabolic or alcoholic encephalopathy
- syringomyelia / Tabes dorsalis

 

X-ray

 

Degenerative changes - C5/6 commonest level followed by C6/7

Alignment - lordosis v kyphosis
 

Cervical Stenosis Kyphotic AlignmentLordotic Cervical Spine

 

Ossification PLL

 

Cervical Spine OPLL

 

Flexion / Extension views show instability
- > 3 o
- > 11 mm

 

Torg-Pavlov's Ratio (A/B)

 

Pavlovs ratioPavlovs Ratio xray

 

AP diameter of spinal canal (A) divided by the AP diameter of body (B) at same level
- should be 1.0

- < 0.8 is narrowed and stenotic

 

MRI

 

1. Space available for cord (SAC)

- Sagittal diameter of spinal canal - sagittal diameter spinal cord

- normal (17mm)
- relative (13mm)
- absolute stenosis (10mm)

 

Reduced by disc / osteophytes / OPLL / deformity / instability

 

C stenosisCx stenosis 2Cx stenosis

Single level stenosis                          Double level stenosis                                 Multi-level stenosis

 

2. Compression Ratio
- banana cord
- divide the smallest AP diameter by largest transverse diameter at same level of spinal cord
- ratio of < 0.4 after decompression particularly with myelopathy > 6 months has poor prognosis

 

Cervical Myelopathy Compression Cord RatioBanana shaped cord

Banana shaped cord

 

3. Cross sectional area of spinal cord
- < 30 mm2 poor prognosis

 

4. Evidence of cord edema / spinal cord damage

- often seen after acute injury in setting of stenosis

- best seen on STIR MRI

 

Cx stenosis 1MRI cord damage stenosisCervical cord damage

Spinal cord edema / injury

 

CT

 

Helps distinguish disc from osteophytes

- soft v hard disc

- diagnose OPLL

 

OPLL Cervical SpineOPLL 2

OPLL on CT

 

OPLL MRIOPLL 1

MRI and CT in same patient with OPLL

 

Natural History

 

Wilson et al Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2013

- 8% of asymptomatic patients with MRI changes will experience myelopathy at 1y

- 23% at 44 mo

 

Management

 

Non operative

Simple analgesics - NSAIDS
Physiotherapy with isometric strengthening

Traction and manipulation contraindicated

Counsel them to the risks of trauma

 

Operative

 

Absolute Indications

 

Progressive neurological deficit

 

Relative indications

 

Debilitating symptoms

Acute central cord syndrome

Compression parameters on imaging

- compression ratio < 0.4
- transverse spinal cord diameter of < 40 mm2
- increased signal intensity of cord on T2 of MRI

 

Lumbar and cervical stenosis

 

The patient with cervical and lumbar stenosis

- should have the cervical spine decompressed first

- risk of intubation damage to cervical spine
- reduces need for lumbar surgery
- leg symptoms may improve after the cervical decompression

 

Preoperative Considerations

 

Positioning should avoid hyperextension of the cervical spine

- may need awake fibreoptic intubation

 

Options

 

Anterior approach

 

Techniques

- ACDF

- corpectomy

 

Advantage

- restore or maintain lordosis

- disc removal

 

Disadvantage

- more difficult to decompress neural foramina

- difficult in setting of OPLL

- swallowing trouble in elderly patients

 

Posterior approach

 

Techniques

- laminectomy and fusion

- laminoplasty

 

Indication

- OPLL

- severe multilevel stenosis > 3 levels

 

Contra-indication

- kyphotic deformity

 

Results

 

Anterior versus Posterior surgical approaches

 

Fehlings et al Spine 2013

- 264 patients in prospective study

- 169 anterior approach and 95 posterior approach

- anterior approach patients younger and with milder myelopathy

- equivalent efficacy

 

Laminoplasty versus laminectomy / fusion

 

Fehlings et al Spine J 2017

- prospective study of 266 patients

- 100 laminoplasty and 166 laminectomy / fusion

- minimal statistical difference between two groups

 

ACDF versus corpectomy

 

Wang et al Medicine 2016

- multilevel ACDF versus anterior cervical corpectomy and fusion

- meta-analysis of 8 studies and 878 patients

- ACDF had better postoperative angles and fusion rates, and reduced blood loss and complications

 

Ossification of Posterior Longitudinal Ligament (OPLL)

 

Nakashima et al JBJS 2016

- prospective study of 135 patients with OPLL undergoing decompression

- no difference in outcomes compared with those without OPLL

- higher risk of complications

 

ACDF

 

ACDF stenosis 1Stenosis ACDF 2Stenosis ACDF

 

Indication

 

Anterior cord compression

Single or double level compression

Kyphotic deformity

 

Advantages
 

Removes entire disc

Maintain / restore lordosis

 

Disadvantages

 

Difficulty decompressing the nerve roots in foramen
Difficult to decompression vertebral bodies

Relatively contra-indicated with OPLL

 

Corpectomy

 

Concept

 

Can remove body with disc above and below and decompress multiple levels

 

Two level myelopathyCorpectomy 1Corpectomy 2

 

Indication

- multilevel disease

- soft and hard disc causing compression

- kyphotic deformity

 

Complications

 

Risk of graft extrusion / hardware failure - fewer points of fixation

 

Failed corpectomy 1Failed corpectomy 2

 

Laminectomy and Fusion

 

Cervical Myelopathy Posterior Decompression InstrumentationPosterior laminectomy and fusion

 

Concept

 

Posterior decompression is an indirect technique

- requires posterior shifting of the cord in the thecal sac

 

Indications

Lordotic cervical spine / no kyphotic deformity

Ossification of PLL

- dura may be adhered

- high risk of irreparable dural tears with anterior approach

 

Technique

 

Posterior approach
- prone
- Mayfield head tongs in neutral

- protect eyes / elbows (ulna nerve) / knees (CPN)
- pneumatic compression stockings
- IDC
- infiltration of skin with adrenaline solution

 

Decompression

- wide laminectomy +/- foraminotomy

 

Instrumentation
- avoids progressive kyphotic deformity
- lateral mass screws

 

Cervical Myelopathy Posterior Decompression

 

Complications

 

Postoperative instability / kyphosis
- > 50% facet resection
- avoid by fusion or laminoplasty

 

Increased risk wound issues

 

Laminoplasty

 

Laminoplasty 1Laminoplasty 2Laminoplasty 3

Orthofix laminoplasty

 

Concept

 

Divide lamina unilaterally and insert device to keep lamina elevated

Motion preserving

 

Contra-indications

 

Kyphotic deformity

Neck pain - otherwise need fusion

Instability

 

Combined anterior and posterior

 

 Anterior posteriorAnterior posterior 2

 

Indication

 

Severe deformity

Poor bone quality

Instability

 

Complications

 

Fehlings et al J Neurosurg Spine 2012

- 302 patients from the AOSpine North America Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy Study

- 30 day complication rate of 16%

- late complication rate of 4%

- worsening of myelopathy 1%

- minor cardiopulmonary event 3%, dysphagia 3%, surgical wound infection 2.3%

- higher infection with posterior approach (4.7%) than with anterior approach (0.6%)

- higher dysphagia with anterior approach (2.3%) than with posterior approach (0.9%)

- increased risk with age / operative time / combined anterior and posterior approach

 

Anterior approach (boneschool link)

 

- transient sore throat  - superior laryngeal nerve

- dysphagia

- recurrent laryngeal nerve paralysis

- injury vertebral artery

- Horner's syndrome

 

Dural tears

 

Increased risk with OPLL
- fibrin glue, fascial patch

 

Pseudoarthrosis

 

Jiang et al Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 2012

- systematic review of 12 studies

- multilevel ACDF versus corpectomy

- nonunion rates for 2 level ACDF 18% and 3 level ACDF 37%

- nonunion rates for single level corpectomy 5% and for two level corpectomy 15%

 

C5 nerve palsy

 

Postoperative deltoid and biceps weakness

- associated with C5 foraminal stenosis

 

Bydon et al Neurosurgery 2014

- 1001 cases of anterior and posterior decompression

- overall C5 palsy incidence of 5%

- incidence 1.6% anterior approach and 8.6% posterior approach

- associated with older age, corpectomy, and posterior C4/5 laminotomy

- improved in 6 months of 75% of anterior approach and 89% posterior approach

 

Shou et al Eur Spine J 2015

- meta-analysis of 79 studies and 13,000 patients

- overall incidence 5%

- typically unilateral, more common in males

- most common in laminectomy & fusion (11%)

- lease common in ACDF (3%)

 

Treatment

- foraminotomy

- nerve transfer

 

Progressive kyphotic deformity

 

Associated with posterior approach without fusion

 

Hardware failure