opll頸椎后縱韌帶骨化ppt課件

1、OPLL經(jīng)典綜述講讀經(jīng)典綜述講讀王雪鵬王雪鵬杭州市骨科研討所杭州市骨科研討所杭州市第一人民醫(yī)院骨科杭州市第一人民醫(yī)院骨科Ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament (OPLL) results from pathologic replacement of the PLL with lamellar bone, potentially causing spinal cord compression and neurologic deteriorationOPLL was first described in Japanese patie

2、nts and has classically been considered a cause of myelopathy in patients of East Asian originspondylosismyelopathyradiculopathystenosisdisc herniationAmong patients in Japan with cervical spine disorders, the incidence has been estimated at 1.9% to 4.3% and, in other Asian countries, up to 3.0%OPLL

3、 has been recognized as an etiology of myelopathy regardless of ethnicity, with an estimated incidence rate of 0.1% to 1.7% among North Americans and Europeans PathoanatomyThe PLL runs along the dorsal surface of the C1 anterior arch and cervical vertebral bodies and consists of longitudinal fibers

4、confluent with the tectorial membrane cranially and ending at the sacrum caudallyfunctionally,the PLL resists spine hyperflexionPathophysiologyThe pathologic process leading to OPLL begins with chondroblast- and fibroblast-like spindle cell proliferation, along with vascular infiltration leading to

5、PLL degeneration and hypertrophy. Endochondral ossification follows, resulting in its replacement with mature lamellar boneGenetics,local tissue characteristics, and associated medical comorbidities have all been implicated in this final common pathwayMedical comorbidities are also associated with t

6、he development of OPLLUp to 50% of Caucasian patients with OPLL also have diffuse idiopathic skeletal hyperostosisHypoparathyroidism,hypophosphatemic rickets,hyperinsulinemia, and obesity have been identified as risk factorsNatural HistoryPatients with OPLL commonly present in their fifth and sixth

7、decades,with men affected twice as often as women.Most patients have some neurologic symptoms at diagnosis, with 28% to 39% fulfilling diagnostic criteria for myelopathyIn patients with myelopathy, 64% had deteriorated,however, and 89% of patients with Nurick grade 3 or 4 myelopathy who refused surg

8、ery had progressed to a wheelchair- or bed-bound stateRisk factors for the development of myelopathy include 60% spinal canal stenosis,6 mm of space available for the cord, increased cervical range of motion, and OPLL that is laterally deviated within the spinal canalAge, gender, and the number of l

9、evels affected by OPLL do not affect the prognosisClinical PresentationChanges in gait or balance, loss of fine motor control, and upper extremity weakness,numbness, or paresthesias are suggestive of myelopathyEarly muscular fatigue or worsening symptoms at the extremes of cervical motion are also c

10、oncerningPatients with OPLL are at an increased risk of acute spinal cord injury with trauma,and rapid neurologic deterioration in association association with even a minor trauma or whiplash injury should raise concern for the development of central cord syndromePhysical ExaminationRadiologic Evalu

11、ationThe lateral radiograph is also used to determine the relationship of the OPLL to the kyphosis line (K-line),which is drawn from the center of the canal at C2 to the center of the canal at C7A large OPLL mass or loss of cervical lordosis causes the OPLL to protrude posterior to the K-line (refer

12、red to as K-line negative). This is a negative prognostic factor for posterior surgery aloneCT with sagittal and coronal reformatting has emerged as the benchmark for radiographic evaluation of OPLL and is necessary to reliably characterize it Greater than 60% canal occupancy at any level and a late

13、rally deviated mass are associated with high rates of myelopathyThis “double layer sign on axial or sagittal CT images is associated with dural tear rates 50% with anterior decompression versus 13% when the sign is absentNonsurgical ManagementProphylactic surgery is neither necessary nor recommended

14、 Management includes temporary immobilization with a neck brace, steroidal or nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory medications, activity modification,and physical therapypatients should be advised to avoid activities that may result in sudden or excessive cervical spine motion because OPLL is associated w

15、ith a high rate of acute spinal cord injury, even in patients who do not meet surgical criteriaSurgical TreatmentSurgical decompression is the treatment of choice for patients with Nurick grade 3 or 4 myelopathy or severe radiculopathy caused by OPLL via either an anterior or posterior approachAnter

16、ior Decompression and FusionProponents argue that it allows for a superior decompression and is more effective at maintaining or restoring cervical lordosis than is posterior surgery. Associated anterior pathology, such as disk herniations,can also be addressedDisadvantages include technical difficu

17、lty, inability to decompress cranial to C2, and high rates of pseudarthrosis and dysphagia when three or more levels require treatment Dural tears are also much more common with an anterior approach, given that anterior dural ossification occurs in 13% to 15%Exposure is provided by the standard Smit

18、h-Robinson approach, and diskectomy, hemicorpectomy,or subtotal corpectomy sufficient to allow exposure of the underlying OPLL mass is performedCorpectomies of up to five levels have been performed with success,but removal of three or more contiguous levels is associated with increased complication

19、and reoperation ratesComplications occur as part of the approach (eg, dysphagia, dysphonia), the decompression (eg, C5 palsy, dural tears), or the fusion (eg,graft subsidence, pseudarthrosis)Nerve root palsies occur in 4% to 17% of patients through either direct trauma or traction.Patients present w

20、ith weakness, numbness,pain, or paresthesias, most commonly in the C5 distributionDural tears occur in 4% to 20% of patients, often because of dural ossification or attenuation.Cerebrospinal fluid leakage may result in pseudomeningocele or fistula formation, leading to neural damage, airway compress

21、ion,meningitis, or wound complicationsTears recognized intraoperatively are treated by direct repair or by application of autogenous fascial or synthetic collagen grafts. Closure of pinhole defects or augmentation of repairs is done with thrombogenic sealants, such as fibrin glue or gelatin foam. Po

22、stoperatively, diverting lumbar drains and bed rest can be used In an effort to reduce dural tear rates, Yamaura et al introduced the“anterior floating method for cervical decompression, consisting of subtotal vertebral body resection and thinning, but not removal, of the OPLL. The posterior vertebr

23、al body is not reconstructed, allowing the OPLL to “float anteriorly and away from the spinal canal. At 5-year follow-up, the authors achieved a mean recovery rate of 68.5% and improvement in Japanese Orthopaedic Association scores from 8.3 to 14.2. No leaks of cerebrospinal fluid occurred, but 14%

24、of patients were left with an inadequate decompression. In these patients,or with OPLL progression, the authors recommended subsequent posterior decompression. When addressing more than two or three levels, fibular strut grafts are preferred for their structural support. For one or two levels, struc

25、tural grafts of tricortical iliac crest, fibula, and vertebral bodies have all been described.More recently,interbody cages with nonstructural bone graft or bone graft substitutes have been used.Overall rates of pseudarthrosis vary from 3% to 15%, with the highest rates occurring in patients undergo

26、ing fusion of three or more levels.Posterior DecompressionWhen more than two or three cervical levels are affected by OPLL, posterior surgery (ie, laminoplasty, or laminectomy and fusion) is preferred because of the technical ease and lower rate of complications. Disadvantages include the risk of po

27、stoperative disease progression, inability to correct cervical kyphosis, and poor results in K-line negative patients.Laminoplasty accomplishes this by hinging open the laminae with either an “open door or “French door technique, resulting in a 30% to 40% increase in the size of the spinal canalLami

28、nectomy and fusion entails removal of the laminae followed by instrumented posterolateral fusion,resulting in a 70% to 80% increase in canal volumeA full analysis of the advantages and disadvantages between laminoplasty compared with laminectomy and fusion has been discussed elsewhereOur preference

29、is to use laminectomy and fusion for OPLL because the retained cervical motion with laminoplasty may allow disease progression,and the risk for progression to kyphosis at the affected levels is eliminated with fusionFor severe disease, recovery rates after posterior decompression appear to be lower

30、than those following anterior decompression, but with a lower complication rateIwasaki et al retrospectively compared the results of anterior decompression and fusion with those of laminoplasty; they reported better outcomes after anterior surgery in patients with an OPLL mass occupying 60% of the c

31、anal; however,it results in a reoperation rate of 26% versus 2% in the laminoplasty group. With60% canal occupancy,recovery rates were equivalent. A prospective comparison of anterior decompression and fusion versus laminoplasty found similar results. Patients with 50% canal occupancy had superior r

32、ecovery rates with anterior surgery but equivalentrates with 50% involvement Patients with 5of cervical lordosis also had significantly worse outcomes from laminoplasty, and 50% lost lordosis versus none in the fusion group.Half of the laminoplasty patients experienced OPLL progression versusonly on

33、e after anterior surgery However, surgical complications heavily favored laminoplasty, with a 23% complication rate and a 14% reoperation rate in the anterior group and none in the laminoplasty patients Only one study to date has examined the results of laminectomy and fusion for OPLL.Chen et al rep

34、orted a mean recovery rate of 62% at 5 years among 83 patients who underwent instrumented laminectomy and fusion from C2 or C3 to C7. Patients with a good outcome had significantly more postoperative lordosis (16.1 versus10.4). No other factors, including occupying ratio, were significant between groups. The reoperation rate was 4%, all the result of epidural hematoma formation. Whether posterior fusion had an effect on disease progression was not evaluated, although the authors noted no longterm decline in