颈椎单开门椎板成形术后C5神经根麻痹的研究进展
Progress of C5 Nerve Root Palsy after Open-Door Cervical Expansive Laminoplasty
DOI: 10.12677/ACM.2023.13102354, PDF, HTML, XML, 下载: 297  浏览: 373 
作者: 阿不都沙拉木·阿不力肯, 盛伟斌*:新疆医科大学第一附属医院脊柱外科,新疆 乌鲁木齐
关键词: 颈椎神经根单开门麻痹Cervical Spine Nerve Root Open Door Palsy
摘要: 术后颈5神经根麻痹(C5 nerve root palsy, C5P)是颈椎单开门椎板成形术(open-door cervical expan-sive laminoplasty, LAMP)后常见且可能导致永久神经功能缺陷的并发症,这极大程度影响了对该手术疗效的判断及患者的手术满意度。C5P的确切病因病机尚未完全明确,多数学者支持神经根栓系或脊髓再灌注损伤相关学说。本文结合现有国内外文献对LAMP术后C5P的临床特征、发生率、危险因素、预防措施、治疗及预后做一综述。
Abstract: Postoperative cervical nerve root palsy (C5P) is a common complication after open-door cervical expansive laminoplasty (LAMP) and may lead to permanent neurological deficits, which greatly af-fects the judgment of the efficacy of the procedure and the patients’ satisfaction with the surgery. The exact etiology of C5P has not been fully clarified, and most scholars support the theory of nerve root embolization or spinal cord reperfusion injury. In this paper, we review the clinical character-istics, incidence, risk factors, preventive measures, treatment and prognosis of C5P after LAMP with reference to the existing literature at home and abroad.
文章引用:阿不都沙拉木·阿不力肯, 盛伟斌. 颈椎单开门椎板成形术后C5神经根麻痹的研究进展[J]. 临床医学进展, 2023, 13(10): 16813-16818. https://doi.org/10.12677/ACM.2023.13102354

1. 前言

随着人口老龄化,需要进行多节段颈脊髓病手术治疗的患者数量逐渐增加。LAMP是一种效果显著且并发症较少的手术方法,目前广泛用于治疗大于或等于3个节段受累的慢性压迫性颈脊髓病。然而,LAMP术后颈5神经根麻痹(C5 nerve root palsy, C5P)仍然是一种严重的并发症,患者表现为新发或恶化的术后颈5支配区域运动(和/或)感觉障碍,并且对手术结果不满意。尽管C5P被认为是颈椎LAMP术后的主要并发症之一,但最近的综述仍然显示C5P的发生率在1.4%至23.0%之间 [1] 。然而,该并发症的机制尚未完全阐明,其确切的发病机制仍然不清楚。到目前为止,许多研究已经探讨了C5P的原因,但观点千差万别,为了进一步了解LAMP术后发生C5P的发病机制并减少其风险,需要进行更多的研究。

2. C5P的临床特征

C5P于上世纪60年代由Scoville [2] 和Stoops等 [3] 首次提出,典型的C5P表现为新发或进一步加重的术后肩外展无力,伴或不伴肘关节屈曲无力,并可能伴有C5皮节区感觉障碍 [4] 。然而,颈椎减压手术前路或后路术后均可导致术后C5P,约92%的C5P为单侧发生,8%为双侧 [5] 。关于发病时间有相关报道多数患者在颈椎术后3天内出现相关症状 [6] ;临床表现通常以一到两个肌群的运动障碍为主,严重病例还可能出现感觉障碍。值得注意的是,这种分离性运动障碍不仅发生在C5节段,也发生在C6、C7、C8及T1节段。但不论病因如何,大多数C5P患者的神经功能会良好恢复,约70%的患者在C5P发生后的前6个月内会自行恢复 [7] 。

3. LAMP术后C5P的发生率

关于LAMP手术后C5P的发病率,有大量的文献被报道。在1993~2003年度中,大部分的文章报道其在5%~17%之间 [8] [9] 。有92%的患者发生在一侧 [5] 。在2003~2013年间,Duetzmann等 [10] 对与LAMP有关的文章进行了一次全面评估,结果中表明C5P的发病率超过10%的文献占16%,5%~10%的文章占41%,23%的文献占23%,0%~1%的文献占12.5%。此外,颈椎椎板成形手术方式对C5P的发病率也有一定的影响。Gu等 [11] 在2014年的系统评价中,在颈椎单开门椎板成形术后,C5P的发病率为4.5%,在颈椎双开门椎板成形术后,C5P的发病率为3.1%,在这两种情况下,没有任何的统计学上的差异。

4. LAMP术后发生C5P的危险因素

4.1. 解剖学因素

虽然有报道C4,C6,C7,C8等神经根于LAMP术后皆出现过单一或共同损伤,但其发生率远低于C5神经根 [12] 。故多数学者将其归结为C5神经根本身的特殊特征。首先,C4-5节段小关节相对于其他的关节突关节,它的前部更加突出;其次,C5水平脊髓最粗,而C5神经根最细小(C5神经根是C5~C8中最细小的神经根),而且垂直发出,行程短且直,代偿活动空间小;此外,由于C5椎体处于颈椎生理性前凸的最高点,而且C5节段一般在LAMP减压区的顶端,同时也是脊髓向背侧移位最多的节段水平,所以在减压范围内,C5神经根所受到的机械牵张最大。

4.2. 影像学相关危险因素

C5P与手术前椎间孔狭窄有关。Katsumi等 [13] 回顾性地研究了141名接受颈椎椎管扩大成形术的病人,利用T2 MRI横断面成像技术,对患者手术前的C4-5椎间孔直径进行了测定,结果显示出现C5P的患者椎间孔直径可达1.99 mm,未出现C5P的患者可达2.76 mm。相关研究表明,在C4/5节段轴位CT扫描发现术前C4/5椎间孔直径小于2 mm时,C5神经根麻痹的发病率明显增高,其原因可能与LAMP引起的脊髓向后漂移导致C5神经根于椎管内应力增加有关 [14] 。Takeuchi等 [15] 也报告,C4/5椎间孔狭窄造成C5神经根内压力由于循环不良而增加,最后引起水肿,超声检查提示C5神经根横截面面积增大。这就导致了在脊髓牵拉下更易产生麻痹的症状。“弓弦效应”造成的脊髓向后飘移也被人们进行了大量的探讨,Shiozaki等 [16] 通过利用 MRI技术对19例患者进行了一项前瞻性研究,目的是评估行颈椎椎板成形术后C5神经根麻痹患者的脊髓漂移情况。他们发现C5麻痹的病人有5.5 mm的平均位移距离,与之相比,未出现C5麻痹的病人有3.3 mm的平均位移距离,两组间具有统计学差异。此外,Kaneyama等 [17] 对146例颈椎椎管扩大成形术患者进行了研究,结果表明,C5神经根麻痹患者在C4、5水平的脊髓后移平均为5毫米,而没有出现该并发症的患者则平均仅为2毫米。术中开门角度也会对在单开门手术之后,出现C5P的概率产生不同程度的影响。Uematsu等 [18] 跟踪研究365例颈椎椎管成形术的患者,结果显示,20例发生C5P,发生率为5.5%。在开门角度大于60度的情况下,C5神经根受力过大,麻痹的概率明显增高。Takashi等 [19] 近期对190例脊髓型颈椎病进行了颈椎椎板成形手术,结果显示C5P出现11例,其发生率为5.8%。研究人员利用受试者工作特征曲线(ROC)证实,当开门角度大于53.5度时,C5P发病率显著增高。此外,Usami等人 [20] 利用MRI技术评估颈后多裂肌的肿胀程度是来预测术后C5P的发生,该回顾性研究建立了多因素分析模型,表明颈后多裂肌的肿胀程度越高,术后出现C5P的风险越大。该作者认为,术后多裂肌肿胀程度增加时,可能会牵拉着穿过C4-5椎间盘水平的颈神经背侧支内侧分支。内侧分支的穿行距离最短,因此对C5神经根的牵引力影响最大。这就可以解释为什么C5P通常不是立即在术后发生,而是在一段时间后发生。随着术后多裂肌逐渐肿胀,C5神经根受到的牵引力也逐渐增大。

4.3. 医源性因素

有研究者提出,LAMP术后发生的C5神经根的麻痹多来自术中的操作不当。但该假说无法解释手术后几日出现的C5P或开门门轴侧的神经根麻痹,更何况有部分患者出现双侧神经根麻痹症状 [21] [22] 。此外,Yanase等 [23] 对153例进行颈椎椎管扩大成形术的患者进行了术中电生理监测,结果表明,术后出现C5P,在一定程度上是由于植骨块移位导致椎间孔狭窄,挤压神经根造成的麻痹。Hosono等 [24] 的研究表明,在术中使用高速磨钻的过程中,给予冰盐水清洗可以减少术后神经根麻痹的发生率。所以,他们相信,使用高速磨钻时会引起局部的过高温度,从而对神经根造成伤害。虽然在临床上有部分病例可以用神经根损害理论来解释,但是随着临床上广泛应用的神经电生理监测技术和外科技术的进步,其发生率仍未显著下降。所以,单纯从手术过程中造成的根性损害很难全面阐释C5神经根麻痹的病理机制。

5. 预防措施

5.1. 神经电生理监测

为了避免C5神经根在手术过程中出现医源性损伤,通常采用SSEPs、MEPs、EMG等神经电生理学方法对其进行检测并保护,以期避免C5神经根麻痹的发生。Oya等 [25] 回顾性分析了135例行颈椎椎管扩大成形术的患者,在术中采用经颅电刺激运动诱导电位结合体感诱导电位以及肌电图,共获得131例数据。手术中观察到12个病人出现了不正常的MEPs信号,经分析,9个呈假阳性,3个呈真阳性。3个病人在术后出现C5P,其中2名病人在手术后立即出现,1名病人在手术后第4日出现,他们的结果表明 MEPs可以达到100%的灵敏度和98.4%的特异度。据报道,术后即刻的C5P能够被肌电图和运动诱发电位所提示 [26] [27] 。此外,Jimenez等 [28] 对C5P患者进行了一项回顾性与前瞻性的研究,结果显示在手术中应用EMG可将C5P的发病率从7.3%降低至0.9%。

5.2. 术中体位

在颈椎的外科治疗中,为了更好地暴露术野,在对病人摆体位时,往往需要将其肩部下压。但是,肩部下陷会增加C5P的危险。所以,在摆体位的时候,应该尽可能地不要把病人的肩部给予太大程度地下压,要认真地考虑下压肩部给病人带来的C5P风险和不进行肩部下陷给暴露术野带来的困难之间的关系 [29] 。

5.3. 预防性椎间孔切开术

颈后路单开门术式同时预防性行椎间孔切开术,能否减少C5P发生率目前尚无定论,有研究提出其可能原因在于C4~C5椎间孔切除可减少C5神经根栓系作用 [30] ,但具体机理尚不明确。Komagata等 [30] 发现,在颈椎椎板成形术和椎间孔切除术联合的情况下,C5P的发病率可以从4.0%下降到0.6%。Sasai等 [31] 的结果显示,接受椎板成形术联合椎间孔切除的C5P的发生率是0%。但是,Yuan等 [32] 认为,预防性的C4~C5椎间孔增大并不能有效地防止和降低C5P的发生,反而还会提高C5P的发生概率,因此,在临床上采取这种预防措施时,需要慎重考虑。

5.4. 减小开门角度

Yang等表明,在颈椎椎板成形术的改良术式中,后方椎板的保留可以有效控制脊髓的过度向后漂移,并且降低C5P的发生率。另外,在手术中,我们还采用了合适尺寸的微型钛板并将其呈一定的倾斜角度放置,以减少C5P的发生,从而防止过度减压及脊髓后移。过去的研究中提示,为了获得最优的脊髓位移距离,需将椎管间隙扩大超过50%并使脊髓后移3 mm以上 [31] 。但也有一些报道指出,将椎管间隙增大30%,亦可显著改善患者的神经功能 [33] 。当前,国内外学者普遍主张术中开门角度不宜大于60度,一旦大于60度,C5P发生概率将显著增高 [34] 。

6. 治疗及预后

临床上对术后C5P以保守疗法为主。可以选择休息、使用神经功能营养药物、改善微循环药物等,也可以选择进行肌肉功能恢复训练和物理治疗。目前已有研究表明,C5P恢复的时限与其损伤程度密切相关。Nassr等 [7] 对750例多节段脊髓型颈椎病患者进行了分析,平均恢复时间20.9周,71.4%的患者在6个月后获得了良好的康复,而19.1%的患者未获得康复,从而造成了神经功能缺陷。Sakaura等 [5] 的结果表明,在神经根轻度麻痹的情况下,47.8%的患者在手术后3个月内得到了恢复,重度麻痹的情况下,52%的患者在6个月内恢复。总体而言,C5P预后较好,仅少数病人有残余神经功能障碍。

因此,对于C5P的病因现仍有很大的争论,主要有神经根栓系学说及脊髓缺血再灌注学说,但也有其他因素影响。目前对于C5P的防治手段还很少,需要通过多中心、大规模临床样本的前瞻性研究来更好地阐明C5P的致病机理,并为防治提供依据。

NOTES

*通讯作者。

参考文献

[1] Pan, F.M., Wang, S.J., Ma, B. and Wu, D.S. (2017) C5 Nerve Root Palsy after Posterior Cervical Spine Surgery. Jour-nal of Orthopaedic Surgery, 25.
https://doi.org/10.1177/2309499016684502
[2] Scoville, W.B. (1961) Cervical Spondylosis Treated by Bilateral Facetectomy and Laminectomy. Journal of Neurosurgery, 18, 423-428.
https://doi.org/10.3171/jns.1961.18.4.0423
[3] Stoops, W.L. and King, R.B. (1962) Neural Complications of Cer-vical Spondylosis: Their Response to Laminectomy and Foramenotomy. Journal of Neurosurgery, 19, 986-999.
https://doi.org/10.3171/jns.1962.19.11.0986
[4] Deshpande, N., et al. (2023) Defining Postoperative C5 Palsy and Recovery: A Systematic Review. Journal of Neurosurgery: Spine, 38, 457-464.
https://doi.org/10.3171/2022.11.SPINE221067
[5] Sakaura, H., et al. (2003) C5 Palsy after Decompression Sur-gery for Cervical Myelopathy: Review of the Literature. Spine, 28, 2447-2451.
https://doi.org/10.1097/01.BRS.0000090833.96168.3F
[6] Oh, J.K., et al. (2019) Epidemiology of C5 Palsy after Cervical Spine Surgery: A 21-Center Study. Neurospine, 16, 558-562.
https://doi.org/10.14245/ns.1938142.071
[7] Nassr, A., et al. (2012) The Incidence of C5 Palsy after Multilevel Cervical Decompression Procedures: A Review of 750 Consecutive Cases. Spine, 37, 174-178.
https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0b013e318219cfe9
[8] Tsuzuki, N., Abe, R., Saiki, K. and Li, Z.S. (1996) Extradural Tethering Effect as One Mechanism of Radiculopathy Complicating Posterior Decompression of the Cervical Spinal Cord. Spine, 21, 203-210.
https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-199601150-00008
[9] Kawaguchi, Y., et al. (2003) Minimum 10-Year Fol-lowup after En Bloc Cervical Laminoplasty. Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research, 411, 129-139.
https://doi.org/10.1097/01.blo.0000069889.31220.62
[10] Duetzmann, S., Cole, T. and Ratliff, J.K. (2015) Cervical Laminoplasty Developments and Trends, 2003-2013: A Systematic Review. Journal of Neurosurgery: Spine, 23, 24-34.
https://doi.org/10.3171/2014.11.SPINE14427
[11] Gu, Y., et al. (2014) Incidence and Risk Factors of C5 Palsy following Posterior Cervical Decompression: A Systematic Review. PLOS ONE, 9, e101933.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0101933
[12] Choi, K.C., Ahn, Y., Kang, B.U., Ahn, S.T. and Lee, S.H. (2013) Motor Palsy after Posterior Cervical Foraminotomy: Anatomical Consideration. World Neurosurgery, 79, 405.e1-405.e4.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wneu.2011.03.043
[13] Katsumi, K., et al. (2013) Analysis of C5 Palsy after Cervical Open-Door Laminoplasty: Relationship between C5 Palsy and Foraminal Stenosis. Journal of Spinal Dis-orders and Techniques, 26, 177-182.
https://doi.org/10.1097/BSD.0b013e31823db346
[14] Lee, H.J., Ahn, J.S., Shin, B. and Lee, H. (2017) C4/5 Fo-raminal Stenosis Predicts C5 Palsy after Expansive Open- Door Laminoplasty. European Spine Journal, 26, 2340-2347.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-017-5077-8
[15] Takeuchi, M., et al. (2018) Simple Presurgical Method of Pre-dicting C5 Palsy after Cervical Laminoplasty Using C5 Nerve Root Ultrasonography. Journal of Neurosurgery: Spine, 29, 365-370.
https://doi.org/10.3171/2018.2.SPINE171363
[16] Shiozaki, T., et al. (2009) Spinal Cord Shift on Magnetic Reso-nance Imaging at 24 Hours after Cervical Laminoplasty. Spine, 34, 274-279.
https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0b013e318194e275
[17] Kaneyama, S., et al. (2010) Prospective Study and Multivar-iate Analysis of the Incidence of C5 Palsy after Cervical Laminoplasty. Spine, 35, E1553-E1558.
https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181ce873d
[18] Uematsu, Y., Tokuhashi, Y. and Matsuzaki, H. (1998) Radiculopathy after Laminoplasty of the Cervical Spine. Spine, 23, 2057-2062.
https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-199810010-00004
[19] Tsuji, T., et al. (2017) Factors Associated with Postop-erative C5 Palsy after Expansive Open-Door Laminoplasty: Retrospective Cohort Study Using Multivariable Analysis. European Spine Journal, 26, 2410-2416.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-017-5223-3
[20] Usami, Y., et al. (2020) Impact of Multifidus Muscle Swelling on C5 Palsy after Cervical Laminoplasty. Spine, 45, E10-E17.
https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0000000000003205
[21] Takenaka, S., Hosono, N., Mukai, Y., Miwa, T. and Fuji, T. (2013) The Use of Cooled Saline during Bone Drilling to Reduce the Incidence of Upper-Limb Palsy after Cervical Laminoplasty: Clinical Article. Journal of Neurosurgery: Spine, 19, 420-427.
https://doi.org/10.3171/2013.7.SPINE13144
[22] Wang, H., et al. (2015) Analysis of Correlative Risk Factors for C5 Palsy after Anterior Cervical Decompression and Fusion. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Medi-cine, 8, 3983-3991.
[23] Yanase, M., et al. (2010) Intraoperative Spinal Cord Monitoring of C5 Palsy after Cervical Laminoplasty. Journal of Spinal Disorders & Techniques, 23, 170-175.
https://doi.org/10.1097/BSD.0b013e31819e91b4
[24] Hosono, N., et al. (2009) Potential Risk of Thermal Damage to Cervical Nerve Roots by a High-Speed Drill. The Bone & Joint Journal, 91, 1541-1544.
https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.91B11.22196
[25] Oya, J., et al. (2017) The Accuracy of Multimodality In-traoperative Neuromonitoring to Predict Postoperative Neurologic Deficits following Cervical Laminoplasty. World Neurosurgery, 106, 17-25.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wneu.2017.06.026
[26] Fujiwara, Y., et al. (2016) The Efficacy of Intraoperative Neuro-physiological Monitoring Using Transcranial Electrically Stimulated Muscle-Evoked Potentials (TcE-MsEPs) for Pre-dicting Postoperative Segmental Upper Extremity Motor Paresis after Cervical Laminoplasty. Clinical Spine Surgery, 29, E188-E195.
https://doi.org/10.1097/BSD.0000000000000311
[27] Haghighi, S.S., Blaskiewicz, D.J., Ramirez, B. and Zhang, R. (2016) Can Intraoperative Neurophysiologic Monitoring during Cervical Spine Decompression Predict Post-Operative Segmental C5 Palsy? Journal of Spine Surgery, 2, 167-172.
https://doi.org/10.21037/jss.2016.09.09
[28] Jimenez, J.C., et al. (2005) Palsies of the Fifth Cervical Nerve Root after Cervical Decompression: Prevention Using Continuous Intraoperative Electromyography Monitoring. Journal of Neurosurgery: Spine, 3, 92-97.
https://doi.org/10.3171/spi.2005.3.2.0092
[29] Alonso, F., et al. (1976) Potential Mechanism for Some Postopera-tive C5 Palsies: An Anatomical Study. Spine, 43, 161-166.
https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0000000000002281
[30] Komagata, M., et al. (2004) Prophylaxis of C5 Palsy after Cervical Expansive Laminoplasty by Bilateral Partial Foraminotomy. The Spine Journal, 4, 650-655.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spinee.2004.03.022
[31] Sasai, K., et al. (2003) Preventing C5 Palsy after Laminoplasty. Spine, 28, 1972-1977.
https://doi.org/10.1097/01.BRS.0000083237.94535.46
[32] Yuan, X., et al. (2021) [Effect of Prophylactic C (4, 5) Foraminal Dilatation in Posterior Cervical Open-Door Surgery on Postoperative C (5) Nerve Root Palsy Syndrome]. Chinese Journal of Reparative and Reconstructive Surgery, 35, 1318-1322.
[33] Yang, L., et al. (2013) Modified Plate-Only Open-Door Laminoplasty versus Laminectomy and Fusion for the Treatment of Cervical Stenotic Myelopathy. Orthopedics, 36, e79-e87.
https://doi.org/10.3928/01477447-20121217-23
[34] Hashimoto, M., et al. (2010) C5 Palsy following Anterior Decompression and Spinal Fusion for Cervical Degenerative Diseases. European Spine Journal, 19, 1702-1710.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-010-1427-5