Skip to main content

Table 2 Comparisons for DCM

From: Surgical decision-making for ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament versus other types of degenerative cervical myelopathy: anterior versus posterior approaches

Reference Type of study No. of patients Parameters measured Key findings
Audat et al. 2018 (ref # [7]) Retrospective clinical study 287 Pre-operative and post-operative mean ± standard deviation for NDI Anterior approach appeared to be superior based on the clinical outcomes
Zaveri et al. 2019 (ref # [8]) Non-randomised clinical study 75 Recovery rates of mild, moderate and severe CSM based on mJOA scores Patient outcome mainly determined by clinical severity on presentation
Recovery rates were comparable regardless of the approach within the same category of severity at presentation
Fehlings et al. 2013 (ref # [37]) Prospective observational study 278 NDI pre and post-operatively at 12 months No significant differences between anterior vs posterior approach for NDI improvement
Luo et al. 2015 (ref # [38]) Meta-analysis and systematic review 467 Pre-operative and post-operative JOA scores recovery rate No statistical difference in recovery rate between anterior and posterior approaches
Liu et al. 2011 (ref # [4]0) Non-randomized controlled trial 52 JOA scores, recovery rate, range of motion No differences between ACDF vs laminoplasty for JOA score and recovery rate
Range of motion reduced in ACDF vs laminoplasty
Xu et al. (ref # [39]) Meta-analysis 379 JOA score, recovery rate No differences between ACDF and laminoplasty
  1. ACDF Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion, CSM Cervical spondylotic myelopathy, DCM Degenerative cervical myelopathy, mJOA Modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association, NDI Neck disability index