Laminoplasty Versus Laminectomy and Fusion in the Treatment of Degenerative Cervical Myelopathy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Cost and Patient-Centered Outcomes in the United States

Read full text
Authors: Vishwathsen Karthikeyan, Husain Shakil, Christopher S. Lozano, Armaan K. Malhotra, Uzondu F. Agochukwu, Ankit Indravadan Mehta, C. Rory Goodwin, Nathan Evaniew, Paul Aarne Koljonen, Allan R. Martin, James David Guest, Shekar N. Kurpad
+2 more Jefferson R. Wilson, Aditya Vedantam
Cited by: 1
References: 30

Abstract

Study design Systematic review and meta-analysis. Objective This systematic review and meta-analysis compared cervical laminoplasty (LP) with laminectomy and fusion (LF) for the treatment of degenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM), focusing on healthcare costs and patient-centered outcomes. Methods A systematic review of EMBASE and Medline (inception to September 2024) identified studies comparing LP and LF for multilevel DCM. Outcomes included return-to-work (RTW), direct treatment costs, and changes in pain and opioid use. Meta-analyses were performed using random-effects models to estimate pooled mean differences (MD) between treatment arms and mean per treatment for study outcomes. Study quality was assessed with the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Results Twelve retrospective cohort studies (7581 patients; LP: 1,848, LF: 5733) met inclusion criteria. After appraising the included studies, we determined that 25% were of high quality, 67% were of moderate quality, and 8% were of low quality. LF had higher treatment costs ($74,772.8 USD, 95% CI $29,503.72-$120,041.88) than LP ($52,109.07 USD, 95% CI $12,234.14-$91,985.43), with an MD of −$21,620.69 USD (95% CI −$35,215 to −$8025.53, I 2 = 95%). LF led to greater pain reduction (MD in VAS = 1.60, 95% CI 0.36-2.84, I 2 = 63%). Opioid use was inconsistently reported, preventing meta-analysis. One study found higher RTW rates at 12 months for LP (88.9%) vs LF (64.3%). Conclusion LF incurred greater costs but provided superior pain relief. Significant heterogeneity and limited high-quality evidence highlight the need for further research on cost-effectiveness and patient-centered outcomes.

Fields of Study & Subjects

Cervical and Thoracic Myelopathy Musculoskeletal pain and rehabilitation Pain Mechanisms and Treatments

Publication details

Journal / source
Global Spine Journal
Publisher
SAGE Publications
Volume
16
Issue
1_suppl
Pages
43S–52S
Publication date
1 January 2026
Language
EN