Hemilaminectomy for spinal cord intradural tumors: An institutional experience

• Published in: Asian journal of neurosurgery 2018-07, Vol.13 (3), p.760-765
• Main Authors: KrishnanKutty, Raja, Sreemathyamma, Sunilkumar, Sivanandapanicker, Jyothish, Asher, Prasanth, Prabhakar, Rajmohan, Peethambaran, Anilkumar
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Analysis; Care and treatment; Complications and side effects; Diagnosis; Laminectomy; Original; Original Article; Patient outcomes; Postoperative complications; Spinal cord injuries
• ISSN: 1793-5482; 2248-9614
• DOI: 10.4103/ajns.AJNS_106_18

Introduction: Laminectomy is the workhorse of spinal cord tumor surgery. This procedure is not without the debilitating sequelae of postoperative pain and delayed kyphosis. Hemilaminectomy is an alternate option to laminectomy which offers the advantage of preserving the posterior supporting structures of the spine on the contralateral side. In this study, we analyze the outcome of hemilaminectomy clinically with improvement in pain scores and Nurick's grade as well as radiologically by assessing for the development of delayed kyphosis. We also discuss the technique and operative nuances of hemilaminectomy in intradural extramedullary tumors of the spinal cord. Materials and Methods: All patients with intradural spinal cord tumors were included in the study. All patients underwent unilateral hemilaminectomy (UHL) depending on the laterality of the tumor on the preoperative magnetic resonance imaging. Preoperative neurologic status was assessed with Nurick's grade for tumors involving the cervicothoracic region tumors, and visual analog scale scores were recorded for tumors of Thoracic, Lumbar and Lumbosacral regions. The postoperative outcomes were assessed by improvement in respective scales on follow-up. The occurrence of delayed spinal deformity was assessed by follow-up X-rays. Any complications whether intraoperative or postoperative were recorded. Results: There were a total of 34 cases of intradural extramedullary tumors in this study. Patient population consisted of 11 males and 23 females. Total excision was achieved in 31 patients. In three patients, we were unable to achieve complete removal through UHL. In these patients the procedure was converted to total laminectomy. They were excluded from analysis. The distribution of the tumors was in cervical, cervicothoracic, thoracic, lumbar, and lumbosacral region. All patients presented with pain or varying degrees or neurologic deficits. Sixteen patients underwent UHL from the right side, while 18 from the left. There were no intraoperative complications. The neurological status and pain scores of all patients improved postoperatively at 3 and 6 months of follow-up. There was no radiological evidence of kyphosis of the involved segment. Conclusion: With a small learning curve, UHL is a good corridor for the removal of intradural extramedullary spinal cord tumors. This approach offers the advantage of less postoperative pain and no postoperative deformity.