2018
DOI: 10.1177/2192568217720421
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

A Systematic Review of Classification Systems for Cervical Ossification of the Posterior Longitudinal Ligament

Abstract: Design: Systematic review. Objective: To conduct a systematic review to (1) summarize various classification systems used to describe cervical ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament (OPLL) and (2) evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of various imaging modalities and the reliability of these classification systems.Methods: A search was performed to identify studies that used a classification system to categorize patients with OPLL. Furthermore, studies were included if they reported the diagnostic acc… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

1
39
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
2

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 41 publications
(40 citation statements)
references
References 152 publications
(280 reference statements)
1
39
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Although OPLL differs widely with respect to its shape, extent, and distribution, appropriate classification is critical since there may be significant variations in neurological presentation, disease progression, and risk of complications across OPLL subtypes. While numerous classification systems have been suggested [ 20 ], to our knowledge, no system can properly characterize and best categorize its subtypes. Most classification systems for cervical OPLL are based on morphological characteristics, including the overall shape of the ossification of the ligament [ 20 ].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Although OPLL differs widely with respect to its shape, extent, and distribution, appropriate classification is critical since there may be significant variations in neurological presentation, disease progression, and risk of complications across OPLL subtypes. While numerous classification systems have been suggested [ 20 ], to our knowledge, no system can properly characterize and best categorize its subtypes. Most classification systems for cervical OPLL are based on morphological characteristics, including the overall shape of the ossification of the ligament [ 20 ].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…While numerous classification systems have been suggested [ 20 ], to our knowledge, no system can properly characterize and best categorize its subtypes. Most classification systems for cervical OPLL are based on morphological characteristics, including the overall shape of the ossification of the ligament [ 20 ]. On the contrary, we focused on the segment of myelopathy developed, looked for changes superimposed on the OPLL and found as many degenerative changes as in the normal populations.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…K-Line (-) OPLL is defined as an OPLL foci whose peak exceeds the K-line and is associated with decreased C2–7 ROM and increased occupying ratio and extension/flexion ratio. In these patients, posterior surgical approaches have been shown to lead to inadequate posterior decompression of the spinal cord and significantly worse neurological outcomes [15]. This suggests that in K-line (-) patients, the anterior approach should be more highly considered, as shown by Koda et al [51], who achieved better JOA scores with anterior decompression and fusion than with posterior LAMP or decompression and fusion.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Plain radiography, dynamic imaging, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and computed tomography (CT) are all crucial in the work-up of the OPLL patient. The Japanese Ministry of Public Health and Wellness (JPMPHW) classification system of OPLL is based exclusively on disease appearance on lateral radiography, and is the most widely used classification system [15]. Axial CT is paramount though, as it allows for the assessment of disease severity as measured by the degree of canal compromise by the OPLL mass.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The frequency of each type has been reported as continuous, 25.97%; segmental, 34.26%; mixed, 32.47%; and localized, 7.30%. 12 In a different system, Iwasaki et al 5 classified OPLL as either plateau-shape or hill-shape type based on the Fig. 2.…”
Section: Classifications Based On Lateral Radiograph or Sagittal Ct Imentioning
confidence: 99%