Comparison of Midline Splitting versus Unilateral Open Door Laminoplasty and Its Impact on Patient Outcomes

Abstract

Background: Laminoplasty is a common and effective surgery for decompression of the spinal cord in multilevel cervical myelopathy. The midline splitting technique (MST) and the unilateral open door technique (UODT) are the two most commonly performed laminoplasty techniques with continuous debate on which is preferable. This study aimed to add light to the matter by comparing and exploring the possible causes of different outcomes. Methods: A total of 101 patients who underwent laminoplasty for degenerative cervical myelopathy were included in this study. Radiographic measurements including C2–7 Cobb angle, C2–7 range of motion (ROM), Pavlov ratio of the most compressed level, and canal area with diameter were compared. Modified Japanese Orthopedic Association (mJOA) score and complications including C5 palsy, axial neck pain, hinge fractures, and spacer displacement were also compared. Statistical analysis was performed using independent samples t -test, chi-square test, Fisher’s exact test, and linear mixed model. Results: C2–7 ROM, canal diameter, Pavlov ratio, and mJOA score did not demonstrate differences between the two techniques. The UODT group had greater postoperative canal expansion but had more loss of C2–7 lordosis than did the MST group. Of the complications, hinge fractures were more common in the UODT group, with more loss of C2–7 lordosis in patients with hinge fractures. On the other hand, spacer displacement occurred only in the MST group, with lesser canal expansion in patients with spacer displacement. Conclusions: The two laminoplasty techniques both demonstrated effectiveness in treating patients with multilevel cervical myelopathy. However, care should be given to avoid hinge fractures and spacer displacement since both can possibly lead to unfavorable outcomes.