Abstract:Background: In patients with cervical spondylotic myelopathy caused by ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament, high cord signal (HCS) is frequently observed. However, limited research has investigated the variations in HCS improvement resulting from different surgical approaches. This study aims to explore the potential relationship between the choice of surgical approach and the postoperative improvement of intramedullary high signal in ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament (OPLL) patients. Methods: We extensively reviewed the patients' medical records, based on which demographic information such as gender, age, and body mass index (BMI) were recorded, and assessed the severity of the patients' neurological status preoperatively and postoperatively by using the Japanese Orthopedic Association score (JOAs), focusing on consecutive preoperative and postoperative Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) T2WI measurements, to study the statistical correlation between the improvement of HCS and the choice of surgical approach. Results: There were no significant differences in demographic, imaging parameters, and clinical symptoms between patients undergoing anterior and posterior surgery (p > 0.05, Table 1). However, both improvement in JOAs (Recovery2) and improvement in HCS (CR2) were significantly better in the anterior surgery group two years after surgery (p < 0.05, Table 1). Multifactorial logistic regression analysis revealed that posterior surgery and higher preoperative signal change ratio (SCR) were identified as risk factors for poor HCS improvement at the two-year postoperative period (p < 0.05, Table 2). Table 1 Differences in demographic, imaging parameters, and clinical symptoms in patients with anterior and posterior approach Anterior approach Posterior approach P-Values Demographic data Sex (male/female) 10/12 6/17 0.175 Age 58.59 ± 5.68 61.43 ± 9.04 0.215 Hypertension 14/8 14/9 0.848 Diabetes 16/6 19/4 0.425 BMI 25.58 ± 4.72 26.95 ± 4.58 0.331 Smoking history 19/3 16/7 0.175 Preoperative measured imaging parameters Preoperative SCR 1.615 ± 0.369 1.668 ± 0.356 0.623 CR1 0.106 ± 0.125 0.011 ± 0.246 0.08 CNR 0.33 ± 0.073 0.368 ± 0.096 0.15 C2-7 Cobb angle 8.977 ± 10.818 13.862 ± 13.191 0.182 SVA 15.212 ± 8.024 17.46 ± 8.91 0.38 mK-line INT 3.694 ± 3.291 4.527 ± 2.227 0.323 Imaging follow-up 6 months postoperative SCR 1.45 ± 0.44 1.63 ± 0.397 0.149 2 years postoperative SCR 1.26 ± 0.19 1.65 ± 0.35 0.000** CR2 0.219 ± 0.14 - 0.012 ± 0.237 0.000** Clinical symptoms Preoperative JOAs 10.64 ± 1.59 10.83 ± 1.47 0.679 6 months postoperative JOAs 11.82 ± 1.37 11.65 ± 1.4 0.69 2 years postoperative JOAs 14.18 ± 1.01 12.52 ± 2.06 0.001** Recovery1 0.181 ± 0.109 0.128 ± 0.154 0.189 Recovery2 0.536 ± 0.178 0.278 ± 0.307 0.001** *, statistical significance (p < 0.05). **, statistical significance (p < 0.01) BMI = body mass index. SCR = the signal change ratio between the localized high signal and normal spinal cord signal at the C7-T1 levels. CR1 = the regression of high cord signals at 6 months postoperatively (i.e., CR1 = (Preoperative SCR-SCR at 6 months postoperatively)/ Preoperative SCR). CR2 = the regression of high cord signal at 2 years postoperatively (i.e., CR2 = (Preoperative SCR-SCR at 2 years postoperatively)/ Preoperative SCR). CNR = canal narrowing ratio. SVA = sagittal vertical axis. mK-line INT = modified K-line interval. JOAs = Japanese Orthopedic Association score. Recovery1 = degree of JOAs recovery at 6 months postoperatively (i.e., Recover1 = (JOAs at 6 months postoperatively-Preoperative JOAs)/ (17- Preoperative JOAs)). Recovery2 = degree of JOAs recovery at 2 years postoperatively (i.e., Recover2 = (JOAs at 2 years postoperatively-Preoperative JOAs)/ (17-Preoperative JOAs)) Table 2 Linear regression analyses for lower CR2 values 95% CI P value Uni-variable analyses Demographic data Sex (male/female) - 0.01 0.221 0.924 Age - 0.015 0.003 0.195 Hypertension - 0.071 0.204 0.334 Diabetes - 0.195 0.135 0.716 BMI - 0.375 0.422 0.905 Smoking history - 0.249 0.077 0.295 Surgical approach - 0.349 - 0.113 0.000# Preoperative measured imaging parameters C2-7 Cobb angle - 0.009 0.002 0.185 SVA - 0.008 0.008 0.995 mK-line INT - 0.043 0.005 0.122 Preoperative SCR 0.092 0.445 0.004# CR1 0.156 0.784 0.004# CNR - 0.76 0.844 0.918 Multi-variable analyses Surgical approach - 0.321 - 0.118 0.000** Preoperative SCR 0.127 0.41 0.000** CR1 - 0.018 0.501 0.067 #, variables that achieved a significance level of p < 0.1 in the univariate analysis *statistical significance (p < 0.05). **statistical significance (p < 0.01) BMI = body mass index. SCR = the signal change ratio between the localized high signal and normal spinal cord signal at the C7-T1 levels. CR1 = the regression of high cord signals at 6 months postoperatively (i.e., CR1 = (Preoperative SCR-SCR at 6 months postoperatively)/ Preoperative SCR). CR2 = the regression of high cord signal at 2 years postoperatively (i.e., CR2 = (Preoperative SCR-SCR at 2 years postoperatively)/ Preoperative SCR). CNR = canal narrowing ratio. SVA = sagittal vertical axis. mK-line INT = modified K-line interval CONCLUSIONS: For patients with OPLL-induced cervical spondylotic myelopathy and intramedullary high signal, anterior removal of the ossified posterior longitudinal ligament and direct decompression offer a greater potential for regression of intramedullary high signal. At the same time, this anterior surgical strategy improves clinical neurologic function better than indirect decompression in the posterior approach.

Effects of Preoperative Cervical Range of Motion on Clinical Outcomes Following Posterior Decompression: A Multicenter Study of Patients With Cervical Ossification of the Posterior Longitudinal Ligament

Radiological Manifestations and Surgical Outcome of Combined Upper Cervical Cord Compression and Cervical Ossification of the Posterior Longitudinal Ligament with a Minimum 2-Year Follow-Up

[Use Sagittal Reconstruction CT for Making Decisions Regarding the Surgical Strategy for Cervical Ossification of the Posterior Longitudinal Ligament].

Extended Laminoplasty for Ossification of Posterior Longitudinal Ligament Involving the C2 Segment

Does the presence of preoperative neck pain impact clinical outcomes after posterior decompression in patients with cervical ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament?: Retrospective multicenter cohort study

Effect of posterior decompression with and without fixation on a kyphotic cervical spine with ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament

Comparative Effectiveness and Functional Outcome of C2 Dome-like Expansive <i>Versus</i> C2 Expansive Open-door Laminoplasty for Upper Cervical Ossification of the Posterior Longitudinal Ligament <i>A Retrospective Cohort Study</i>

Effect of Posterior Decompression on the Spinal Cord of Thoracic Ossification of the Posterior Longitudinal Ligament: A Finite Element Analysis

Effect of microscopically assisted decompression with micro-hook scalpel in the surgical treatment of ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament

Clinical outcome of laminoplasty for cervical ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament with K-line (−) in the neck neutral position but K-line (+) in the neck extension position: A retrospective observational study

Comparison of Surgical Outcomes After Posterior Decompression by Junior or Senior Surgeons for Patients With Cervical Ossification of the Posterior Longitudinal Ligament: Results From Retrospective Multicenter Cohort Study

Two‐level Anterior Cervical Corpectomy and Fusion versus Posterior Open‐door Laminoplasty for the Treatment of Cervical Ossification of Posterior Longitudinal Ligament: A Comparison of the Clinical Impact on the Occipito‐Atlantoaxial Complex

[Anterior Decompression for the Treatment of Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy Associated with Ossification of Posterior Longitudinal Ligament].

Factors Affecting the Surgical Outcomes of Patients Treated with “De-Tension” Surgical Strategy for Multilevel Ossification of the Posterior Longitudinal Ligament in the Thoracic Spine: A Minimum 2-Year Follow-Up Study of 83 Patients in a Single Center

Anterior decompression and posterior total laminectomy with fusion for ossification of the cervical posterior longitudinal ligament

Circumferential Decompression Via the Posterior Approach for the Surgical Treatment of Multilevel Thoracic Ossification of the Posterior Longitudinal Ligaments: a Single Institution Comparative Study.

Anterior direct decompression significantly relieves spinal cord high signal in patients with ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament: a case-control study

A New "De-Tension"-guided Surgical Strategy for Multilevel Ossification of Posterior Longitudinal Ligament in Thoracic Spine: a Prospective Observational Study with at Least 3-Year Follow-Up

Surgical efficacy and affecting factor analysis on cervical ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament

A circumferential decompression-based surgical strategy for multilevel ossification of thoracic posterior longitudinal ligament

Long-Term Follow-Up of Multilevel Thoracic Ossification of the Posterior Longitudinal Ligament Following Circumferential Decompression via Posterior Approach: A Retrospective Study