TY - JOUR
T1 - Prospective Comparison of Posterior Decompression and ACDF for 1- to 2-level Degenerative Cervical Myelopathy
AU - Yamamoto, Tatsuya
AU - Nagoshi, Narihito
AU - Yamane, Junichi
AU - Okubo, Toshiki
AU - Kamata, Yasuhiro
AU - Isogai, Norihiro
AU - Kono, Hitoshi
AU - Fujiyoshi, Kanehiro
AU - Kobayashi, Yoshiomi
AU - Shibata, Reo
AU - Kitagawa, Takahiro
AU - Iga, Takahito
AU - Takeda, Kazuki
AU - Suzuki, Satoshi
AU - Ozaki, Masahiro
AU - Matsumoto, Morio
AU - Nakamura, Masaya
AU - Watanabe, Kota
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2025 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.
PY - 2026/5
Y1 - 2026/5
N2 - Study Design. – Prospective multicenter cohort study. Objective. – To compare clinical outcomes between posterior decompression without fusion (PD) and anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) in patients with 1- to 2-level degenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM). Summary of Background Data. – While numerous studies have assessed surgical strategies for multilevel DCM, limited evidence is available for cases involving only one or two levels. Methods. – Among 1482 patients with degenerative cervical spine disorders from 10 Japanese institutions, 353 patients with 1- to 2-level DCM treated with either PD (n=233) or ACDF (n=120) and followed for 2 years were included. Clinical outcomes included the Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) score, Visual Analog Scale (VAS), Japanese Orthopaedic Association Cervical Myelopathy Evaluation Questionnaire (JOACMEQ), and Short Form-36 (SF-36). Group comparisons were adjusted for baseline characteristics and preoperative clinical outcomes using a general linear model. Results. – Perioperative complication and reoperation rates did not significantly differ between groups. ACDF provided significantly greater improvements in VAS scores for neck pain (−22.6 vs. −6.1 mm, P=0.003), upper extremity pain/numbness (−32.7 vs. −18.3 mm, P=0.011), and SF-36 bodily pain (22.8 vs. 10.1, P=0.003) and physical component summary (PCS) scores (9.1 vs. 3.5, P=0.007) compared with the PD group. Conversely, PD yielded greater improvement in the SF-36 social functioning domain (13.3 vs. 2.6, P=0.011). No significant differences were observed in JOA scores, the five domains of JOACMEQ, or other SF-36 domains. Conclusions. – Both PD and ACDF provided comparable improvements in neurological function as measured by JOA and JOACMEQ scores, indicating similar efficacy in treating DCM. ACDF was more effective for alleviating neck and arm pain and enhancing physical health, while PD resulted in social functioning. Given similar complication rates, surgical strategy should be individualized based on each patient’s clinical presentation.
AB - Study Design. – Prospective multicenter cohort study. Objective. – To compare clinical outcomes between posterior decompression without fusion (PD) and anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) in patients with 1- to 2-level degenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM). Summary of Background Data. – While numerous studies have assessed surgical strategies for multilevel DCM, limited evidence is available for cases involving only one or two levels. Methods. – Among 1482 patients with degenerative cervical spine disorders from 10 Japanese institutions, 353 patients with 1- to 2-level DCM treated with either PD (n=233) or ACDF (n=120) and followed for 2 years were included. Clinical outcomes included the Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) score, Visual Analog Scale (VAS), Japanese Orthopaedic Association Cervical Myelopathy Evaluation Questionnaire (JOACMEQ), and Short Form-36 (SF-36). Group comparisons were adjusted for baseline characteristics and preoperative clinical outcomes using a general linear model. Results. – Perioperative complication and reoperation rates did not significantly differ between groups. ACDF provided significantly greater improvements in VAS scores for neck pain (−22.6 vs. −6.1 mm, P=0.003), upper extremity pain/numbness (−32.7 vs. −18.3 mm, P=0.011), and SF-36 bodily pain (22.8 vs. 10.1, P=0.003) and physical component summary (PCS) scores (9.1 vs. 3.5, P=0.007) compared with the PD group. Conversely, PD yielded greater improvement in the SF-36 social functioning domain (13.3 vs. 2.6, P=0.011). No significant differences were observed in JOA scores, the five domains of JOACMEQ, or other SF-36 domains. Conclusions. – Both PD and ACDF provided comparable improvements in neurological function as measured by JOA and JOACMEQ scores, indicating similar efficacy in treating DCM. ACDF was more effective for alleviating neck and arm pain and enhancing physical health, while PD resulted in social functioning. Given similar complication rates, surgical strategy should be individualized based on each patient’s clinical presentation.
KW - anterior cervical discectomy and fusion
KW - cervical disc herniation
KW - cervical spondylotic myelopathy
KW - degenerative cervical myelopathy
KW - one- or two-level
KW - ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament
KW - posterior decompression without fusion
KW - surgical approach
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/105015050568
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/105015050568#tab=citedBy
U2 - 10.1097/BRS.0000000000005491
DO - 10.1097/BRS.0000000000005491
M3 - Article
C2 - 40898919
AN - SCOPUS:105015050568
SN - 0362-2436
VL - 51
SP - 603
EP - 609
JO - Spine
JF - Spine
IS - 9
ER -