IMPACT OF SURGICAL APPROACH (ANTERIOR VS POSTERIOR) ON OUTCOMES IN CERVICAL SPONDYLOTIC MYELOPATHY: A META-ANALYSIS
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.21460/bikdw.v10i2.1255Keywords:
anterior cervical discectomy, cervical spondylotic myelopathy, posterior decompression, meta-analysisAbstract
Cervical spondylotic myelopathy (CSM) is the leading cause of non-traumatic spinal cord dysfunction in older adults. Surgical decompression is the standard treatment for moderate to severe cases, but the optimal approach anterior versus posterior remains debated, particularly in multilevel disease. To compare the clinical outcomes of anterior and posterior surgical approaches in the treatment of multilevel cervical spondylotic myelopathy through a systematic review and meta-analysis of recent studies.A systematic search of PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library was conducted for comparative studies published between January 2020 and October 2025. Eligible studies compared anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) to posterior decompression (laminoplasty or laminectomy with/without fusion) for multilevel CSM. Primary outcomes were Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) score, complication rates, revision surgery and length of stay. Meta-analysis was conducted using RevMan 5.4. Seven studies (n = 12,810 patients) met the inclusion criteria. There was no significant difference in neurological recovery between anterior and posterior approaches (mean difference in JOA score = 0.29, 95% CI: –0.10 to 0.69; p = 0.15; I² = 0%). The anterior group showed a non-significant trend toward fewer complications (RR = 0.67, 95% CI: 0.38–1.20; p = 0.18; I² = 52%) but had a significantly lower revision surgery rate (RR = 0.46, 95% CI: 0.39–0.54; p < 0.00001; I² = 0%). Anterior surgery was also associated with a shorter hospital stay (mean difference = –2.02 days, 95% CI: –2.37 to –1.67; p < 0.00001; I² = 49%). In patients with multilevel CSM, anterior approaches particularly ACDF provide comparable neurological recovery but result in lower revision rates and shorter hospitalization compared to posterior approaches. While anterior surgery may be preferred when anatomically feasible, surgical decisions should remain patient-specific based on alignment, pathology, and comorbidities.
References
1. Nouri A, Tetreault L, Singh A, Karadimas SK, Fehlings MG. Degenerative Cervical Myelopathy: Epidemiology, Genetics, and Pathogenesis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2015;40(12):E675-E693. doi:10.1097/BRS.0000000000000913
2. Karadimas SK, Erwin WM, Ely CG, Dettori JR, Fehlings MG. Pathophysiology and natural history of cervical spondylotic myelopathy. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2013;38(22 Suppl 1):S21-S36. doi:10.1097/BRS.0b013e3182a7f2c3
3. Mattei TA, Goulart CR, Milano JB, Dutra LP, Fasset DR. Cervical spondylotic myelopathy: pathophysiology, diagnosis, and surgical techniques. ISRN Neurol. 2011;2011:463729. doi:10.5402/2011/463729
4. Bakhsheshian J, Mehta VA, Liu JC. Current Diagnosis and Management of Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy. Global Spine J. 2017;7(6):572-586. doi:10.1177/2192568217699208
5. Fehlings MG, Barry S, Kopjar B, et al. Anterior versus posterior surgical approaches to treat cervical spondylotic myelopathy: outcomes of the prospective multicenter AOSpine North America CSM study in 264 patients. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2013;38(26):2247-2252. doi:10.1097/BRS.0000000000000047
6. Zhang L, Chen J, Cao C, et al. Anterior versus posterior approach for the therapy of multilevel cervical spondylotic myelopathy: a meta-analysis and systematic review. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2019;139(6):735-742. doi:10.1007/s00402-018-03102-6
7. Luo J, Cao K, Huang S, et al. Comparison of anterior approach versus posterior approach for the treatment of multilevel cervical spondylotic myelopathy. Eur Spine J. 2015;24(8):1621-1630. doi:10.1007/s00586-015-3911-4
8. Lee JJ, Lee N, Oh SH, et al. Clinical and radiological outcomes of multilevel cervical laminoplasty versus three-level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion in patients with cervical spondylotic myelopathy. Quant Imaging Med Surg. 2020;10(11):2112-2124. doi:10.21037/qims-20-220
9. Wang B, Lü G, Kuang L. Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion with stand-alone anchored cages versus posterior laminectomy and fusion for four-level cervical spondylotic myelopathy: a retrospective study with 2-year follow-up. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2018;19(1):216. Published 2018 Jul 12. doi:10.1186/s12891-018-2136-1
10. Zhai JL, Guo SG, Nie L, Hu JH. Comparison of the anterior and posterior approach in treating four-level cervical spondylotic myelopathy. Chin Med J (Engl). 2020;133(23):2816-2821. doi:10.1097/CM9.0000000000001146
11. Ahmed, O.E.F., Galal, A. Multiple level anterior cervical discectomy and fusion versus posterior laminectomy for the management of multilevel cervical spondylotic myelopathy: clinical and radiological outcome. Egypt J Neurol Psychiatry Neurosurg 56, 32 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1186/s41983-020-00162-7
12. Nunna RS, Khalid S, Chiu RG, et al. Anterior vs Posterior Approach in Multilevel Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy: A Nationwide Propensity-Matched Analysis of Complications, Outcomes, and Narcotic Use. Int J Spine Surg. 2022;16(1):88-94. doi:10.14444/8198
13. Wilkerson CG, Sherrod BA, Alvi MA, et al. Differences in Patient-Reported Outcomes Between Anterior and Posterior Approaches for Treatment of Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy: A Quality Outcomes Database Analysis. World Neurosurg. 2022;160:e436-e441. doi:10.1016/j.wneu.2022.01.049
14. Ambati VS, Macki M, Chan AK, et al. Three-level ACDF versus 3-level laminectomy and fusion: are there differences in outcomes? An analysis of the Quality Outcomes Database cervical spondylotic myelopathy cohort. Neurosurg Focus. 2023;55(3):E2. doi:10.3171/2023.6.FOCUS23295
15. Yeh KT, Chen IH, Lee RP, et al. Two surgical strategies for treating multilevel cervical spondylotic myelopathy combined with kyphotic deformity. Medicine (Baltimore). 2020;99(7):e19215. doi:10.1097/MD.0000000000019215
16. Gore DR. Roentgenographic findings in the cervical spine in asymptomatic persons: a ten-year follow-up. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2001;26(22):2463-2466. doi:10.1097/00007632-200111150-00013
17. Du W, Wang HX, Lv J, et al. Cervical alignment and clinical outcome of anterior cervical discectomy and fusion vs. anterior cervical corpectomy and fusion in local kyphotic cervical spondylotic myelopathy. Heliyon. 2023;9(8):e19106. Published 2023 Aug 14. doi:10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e19106
18. Heller JG, Edwards CC 2nd, Murakami H, Rodts GE. Laminoplasty versus laminectomy and fusion for multilevel cervical myelopathy: an independent matched cohort analysis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2001;26(12):1330-1336. doi:10.1097/00007632-200106150-00013
19. Cheung JP, Luk KD. Complications of Anterior and Posterior Cervical Spine Surgery. Asian Spine J. 2016;10(2):385-400. doi:10.4184/asj.2016.10.2.385
20. Chen TP, Qian LG, Jiao JB, et al. Anterior decompression and fusion versus laminoplasty for cervical myelopathy due to ossification of posterior longitudinal ligament: A meta-analysis. Medicine (Baltimore). 2019;98(1):e13382. doi:10.1097/MD.0000000000013382
21. Yamamoto T, Nagoshi N, Yamane J, et al. Prospective Comparison of Posterior Decompression and ACDF for 1-2-Level Degenerative Cervical Myelopathy. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). Published online September 3, 2025. doi:10.1097/BRS.0000000000005491
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
Citation Check
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Muhammad Deni Nasution, Moriko Madadoni Sebayang, Muhammad Rafif Ginting
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish in Berkala Ilmiah Kedokteran Duta Wacana agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International (CC BY-SA 4.0) License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
This work is licensed under CC BY-SA 4.0
