Table of Contents
ISRN Orthopedics
Volume 2012, Article ID 165050, 6 pages
Review Article

Operative Outcomes for Cervical Degenerative Disease: A Review of the Literature

Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Shiga University of Medical Science, Seta Tsukinowa-cho, Otsu, Shiga 520-2192, Japan

Received 20 October 2011; Accepted 29 November 2011

Academic Editors: A. Combalía, A. Karantanas, and C. Mathoulin

Copyright © 2012 Kazuya Nishizawa et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.


To date, several studies were conducted to find which procedure is superior to the others for the treatment of cervical myelopathy. The goal of surgical treatment should be to decompress the nerves, restore the alignment of the vertebrae, and stabilize the spine. Consequently, the treatment of cervical degenerative disease can be divided into decompression of the nerves alone, fixation of the cervical spine alone, or a combination of both. Posterior approaches have historically been considered safe and direct methods for cervical multisegment stenosis and lordotic cervical alignment. On the other hand, anterior approaches are indicated to the patients with cervical compression with anterior factors, relatively short-segment stenosis, and kyphotic cervical alignment. Recently, posterior approach is widely applied to several cervical degenerative diseases due to the development of various instruments. Even if it were posterior approach or anterior approach, each would have its complication. There is no Class I or II evidence to suggest that laminoplasty is superior to other techniques for decompression. However, Class III evidence has shown equivalency in functional improvement between laminoplasty, anterior cervical fusion, and laminectomy with arthrodesis. Nowadays, each surgeon tends to choose each method by evaluating patients’ clinical conditions.