Retrospective cohort study.Objective:
To compare the short-term outcomes for patients undergoing cervical laminoplasty versus posterior decompression and fusion for multilevel cervical pathology.Summary of Background Data:
There are conflicting data regarding the merits of cervical laminoplasty and posterior decompression and fusion for the treatment of multilevel cervical pathology.Methods:
Patients who underwent cervical laminoplasty or posterior decompression and fusion were identified in the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ACS-NSQIP) database from 2010 to 2012. Baseline patient characteristics were compared using bivariate logistic regression. Propensity-adjusted multivariate regressions were performed to assess differences in postoperative length of stay, adverse events, and 30-day readmission.Results:
A total of 779 patients were included in this study: 437 (56.1%) underwent cervical decompression and fusion and 342 (43.9%) underwent cervical laminoplasty. Decompression and fusion patients were found to be more comorbid at baseline than laminoplasty patients based on increased American Society of Anesthesiologists scores and Charlson Comorbidity Index.Results:
Propensity-adjusted multivariate analysis was used to control for differences in baseline patient characteristics, and found that compared with laminoplasty patients, decompression and fusion patients had increased length of stay (+1.2 d, P<0.001), greater rates of any adverse event (OR=1.7, P=0.018), and were more likely to be readmitted (OR=2.3, P=0.028).Conclusions:
Posterior cervical decompression and fusion patients were found to have moderately worse short-term outcomes than laminoplasty patients. The information provided here can be used to inform patients and surgeons about the likely perioperative experience after they have made the decision to pursue 1 of these 2 procedures.