Analysis reveals significant clinical improvements in cervical kyphosis patients, suggesting effective surgical intervention.
Objective: To analyze long-term clinical and radiological outcomes after multilevel anterior osteotomy with posterior instrumentation in patients with ossification of posterior longitudinal ligament (OPLL)-induced myelopathy and cervical kyphosis.Methods: Patients who underwent multilevel anterior osteotomy with posterior instrumentation for OPLL-induced myelopathy and cervical kyphosis and had a minimum of 5-year follow-up were included. Clinical outcomes (Japanese Orthopaedic Association score system for cervical myelopathy [C-JOA], 12-item Short Form health survey [SF-12], Neck Disability Index [NDI]) and radiological parameters (C2–7 lordosis, center of gravity of the head [CGH]-C7 sagittal vertical axis [SVA], T1 slope) were analyzed at the preoperative, immediate postoperative, and latest follow-up timepoints.Results: Twenty-eight patients were included. The average follow-up period was 66.4 months. All clinical outcome parameters showed significant improvement. C-JOA, SF-12, and NDI showed significant improvement at latest follow-up (p<0.001). C2–7 lordosis increased significantly immediately postoperatively (-6.0°±10.4°) compared to preoperatively (+9.2°±9.6°), and was largely maintained at latest follow-up (-5.7°±9.4°). T1 slope significantly increased between the immediate postoperative timepoint (21.9°±7.7°) and latest follow-up (24.2°±9.5°) (p=0.046). CGH-C7 SVA significantly increased between the immediate postoperative timepoint (22.7±14.8 mm) and latest follow-up (32.2±22.6 mm) (p=0.046).Conclusion: Multilevel anterior osteotomy with posterior instrumentation is a safe and effective surgical option for OPLL-induced myelopathy with kyphotic cervical alignment. Future studies are required to investigate the forward tilting of cervical spine over time after surgery.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kim et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: