Letter to the Editor, Regarding “Clinical Outcomes Measures in Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy”
To the Editor:
I read with great interest the article by Manzano et al1 in the February 2012 issue of Neurosurgery. In this prospective randomized study, the authors compare the clinical, radiological, and patient satisfaction outcomes between laminoplasty and laminectomy and fusion for the treatment of multilevel cervical spondylotic myelopathy. Because it is not the point of this commentary, I will not focus on the clinical or radiological reported outcomes but instead will delineate some important considerations regarding “self-reported” quality-of-life measures.
In relation to such outcomes, the authors found that the postoperative 36-Item Short Form General Health Survey (SF-36) scores (P = .05) and the Nurick Disability Index (NDI) scores (P = .05) were “significantly improved” in the laminoplasty group but not in the laminectomy and fusion group. In relation to the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) scores, the study demonstrated a “statistically significant” (P = .05) improvement in neck, interscapular, and arm pain 1 year after surgery in the laminoplasty, but not in the laminectomy and fusion, group.