• Bin Zheng, Zhenqi Zhu, Jianfeng Ding, Gen Li, Yan Liang, Chen Guo, Shuaiqi Zhu, and Haiying Liu.
• Spine Surgery, Peking University People's Hospital, Beijing, China.
• World Neurosurg. 2024 Sep 11; 192: 9810898-108.

BackgroundTo evaluate efficacy and safety between C3 laminectomy + open-door laminoplasty and open-door laminoplasty alone.MethodsElectronic databases were systematically searched up to January 2024. Review Manager 5.4 was applied to manage the data and perform the review. Cochrane Library, PubMed, OVID, and Web of Science were searched for studies comparing C3 laminectomy + open-door laminoplasty and open-door laminoplasty alone. Forest plots were constructed for each analysis group.ResultsAfter selection, 9 eligible articles included 10 comparison groups, with a combined 320 patients who underwent C3 laminectomy + open-door laminoplasty and 355 who underwent open-door laminoplasty alone. There was no difference in operative time, blood volume, Japanese Orthopaedic Association score, Japanese Orthopaedic Association recovery score, visual analog scale score, Neck Disability Index, complications, axial symptoms, T1 slope, range of motion, and cervical sagittal vertical axis. C3 laminectomy + open-door laminoplasty was superior in C2-C7 Cobb angle.ConclusionsAlthough C3 laminectomy + open-door laminoplasty has theoretic advantages, meta-analysis results show that the 2 surgical procedures are similar in terms of clinical symptoms improvement, sagittal balance, and complications. C3 laminectomy combined + open-door laminoplasty is superior only in the preservation of cervical lordosis. The limited number of studies may affect the reliability and generalizability of the results. Future high-quality, multicenter randomized controlled trials are needed to verify efficacy and safety.Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

4 keywords...

hide…