Objective: Postoperative loss of cervical lordosis remains a common and clinically relevant complication following laminoplasty, negatively affecting neck pain, neurological recovery, and long-term sagittal balance. However, reliable and easily applicable preoperative predictors for identifying patients at high risk of cervical lordosis deterioration remain limited. This study aims to investigate whether preoperative C2 slope (C2S) independently predicts cervical lordosis deterioration following laminoplasty.
Methods: This retrospective cohort study included 179 patients who underwent cervical laminoplasty for cervical spondylotic myelopathy at our institution between April 2014 and December 2020, with a minimum follow-up of 24 months. Radiological parameters including C2-7 Cobb angle, cervical sagittal vertical axis (cSVA), C7 slope, and C2S are measured preoperatively and at final follow-up. Patients are divided into lordosis deterioration group (> 5°) and control group (≤ 5°). B Between-group comparisons are performed using independent-samples t tests and χ2 tests. Binary logistic regression analysis is conducted to identify independent predictors of postoperative cervical lordosis loss. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis is used to evaluate predictive performance and determine the optimal cutoff value.
Results: The lordosis loss group (n = 55) shows significantly higher preoperative C2S (14.57° ± 3.47° vs. 9.52° ± 7.30°, p < 0.001), lower preoperative Cobb angle (13.01° ± 4.91° vs. 16.1° ± 6.50°, p < 0.001), and greater cSVA (2.58 ± 1.45 cm vs. 2.13 ± 1.42 cm, p = 0.027) compared to controls. The lordosis loss group demonstrates worse postoperative neck pain VAS scores (3.31 ± 1.63 vs. 2.40 ± 1.56, p < 0.001) and slightly lower JOA scores (15.45 ± 1.14 vs. 15.78 ± 1.12, p = 0.037). Multivariate analysis reveals preoperative C2S as the only independent predictor (OR = 1.176, p < 0.001), with 11.49 as cutoff value for C2S.
Conclusion: Elevated preoperative C2S independently predicts postoperative cervical lordosis deterioration. C2S measurement provides a simple, effective tool for identifying high-risk patients and optimizing surgical planning.
| [1] |
D.-H. Lee, S. Park, J. H. Cho, C. J. Hwang, J. J. Yang, and C. S. Lee, “Risk Factors for Postoperative Loss of Lordosis, Cervical Kyphosis, and Sagittal Imbalance After Cervical Laminoplasty,” World Neurosurgery 180 (2023): e324–e333.
|
| [2] |
C.-W. Kim, S.-J. Hyun, and K.-J. Kim, “Surgical Impact on Global Sagittal Alignment and Health-Related Quality of Life Following Cervical Kyphosis Correction Surgery: Systematic Review,” Neurospine 17, no. 3 (2020): 497–504.
|
| [3] |
T. Sakaguchi, A. Heyder, M. Tanaka, et al., “Rehabilitation to Improve Outcomes After Cervical Spine Surgery: Narrative Review,” Journal of Clinical Medicine 13, no. 18 (2024): 5363.
|
| [4] |
Y. Diao, X. Hu, M. Hao, et al., “Analysis of the Risk Factors for Loss of Cervical Lordosis After Surgical Removal of Cervical Spinal Cord Tumor,” Neurosurgical Review 48, no. 1 (2025): 22.
|
| [5] |
J. H. Jung, J. H. Jeong, J. H. Hong, M. S. Han, and J. K. Lee, “Impact of T1 Slope as a Predictor of Loss of Cervical Lordosis and Health-Related Quality of Life After Laminoplasty in Patients With Ossification of the Posterior Longitudinal Ligament: A Retrospective Cohort Study,” Journal of Korean Neurosurgical Association 69 (2025): 124–134.
|
| [6] |
M. R. Kann, M. A. Ruiz-Cardozo, K. Barot, et al., “Frailty Index as Predictors of Loss of Cervical Lordosis Following Laminoplasty in Patients With Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy,” Journal of Craniovertebral Junction and Spine 16, no. 2 (2025): 148–156.
|
| [7] |
M. Machino, K. Ando, K. Kobayashi, et al., “Postoperative Kyphosis in Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy: Cut-Off Preoperative Angle for Predicting the Postlaminoplasty Kyphosis,” Spine 45, no. 10 (2020): 641–648.
|
| [8] |
J. Chen, J. Wang, X. Wei, et al., “The Importance of Preoperative T1 Slope for Determining Proper Postoperative C2–7 Cobb's Angle in Patients Undergoing Cervical Reconstruction,” Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research 15, no. 1 (2020): 507.
|
| [9] |
N. Bhat, S. Burch, B. Tay, S. H. Berven, V. Deviren, and A. A. Theologis, “Influence of Preoperative T1-Slope and Cervical Sagittal Vertical Axis on Postoperative Cervical Sagittal Alignment Following Posterior Cervical Laminoplasty,” International Journal of Spine Surgery 17, no. 2 (2023): 276–280.
|
| [10] |
R. Sakamoto, H. Nakamoto, Y. Yoshida, et al., “Does T1 Slope Minus Cervical Lordosis Mismatch Affect Surgical Outcomes of Cervical Laminoplasty in the Absence of Preoperative Severe Kyphosis?,” BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders 23, no. 1 (2022): 810.
|
| [11] |
Z. Chai, X. Yang, H. Lu, Y. Zhai, W. Zhang, and H. Yu, “Relationship Between C2 Slope With Sagittal Parameters and Clinical Function of Degenerative Cervical Kyphosis,” Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research 18, no. 1 (2023): 514.
|
| [12] |
S. N. Divi, W. H. Bronson, J. A. Canseco, et al., “How Do C2 Tilt and C2 Slope Correlate With Patient Reported Outcomes in Patients After Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion?,” Spine Journal 21, no. 4 (2021): 578–585.
|
| [13] |
N. Kim, K. S. Suk, J. W. Kwon, et al., “Clinical Significance of the C2 Slope After Multilevel Cervical Spine Fusion,” Journal of Neurosurgery. Spine 38, no. 1 (2023): 24–30.
|
| [14] |
T. S. Protopsaltis, R. Lafage, S. Vira, et al., “Novel Angular Measures of Cervical Deformity Account for Upper Cervical Compensation and Sagittal Alignment,” Clinical Spine Surgery 30, no. 7 (2017): E959–E967.
|
| [15] |
J. Li, X. Long, L. Wang, Q. Li, L. Wang, and Y. Song, “The Cervical Vertebral Bone Quality Score Is a Novel Reliable Index Reflecting the Condition of Paraspinal Muscles and Predicting Loss of Cervical Lordosis After Open-Door Laminoplasty,” Orthopaedic Surgery 17, no. 5 (2025): 1406–1417.
|
| [16] |
R. Sharma, S. A. Borkar, R. Goda, and S. S. Kale, “Which Factors Predict the Loss of Cervical Lordosis Following Cervical Laminoplasty? A Review of Various Indices and Their Clinical Implications,” Surgical Neurology International 10 (2019): 147.
|
| [17] |
A. Gerilmez and S. Naderi, “A Novel Perspective for Analyzing Craniocervical Sagittal Balance and Horizontal Gaze,” World Neurosurgery 149 (2021): e924–e930.
|
| [18] |
T. S. Protopsaltis, S. Ramchandran, J. C. Tishelman, et al., “The Importance of C2 Slope, a Singular Marker of Cervical Deformity, Correlates With Patient-Reported Outcomes,” Spine 45, no. 3 (2020): 184–192.
|
| [19] |
S. Ramchandran, T. S. Protopsaltis, D. Sciubba, et al., “Prospective Multi-Centric Evaluation of Upper Cervical and Infra-Cervical Sagittal Compensatory Alignment in Patients With Adult Cervical Deformity,” European Spine Journal 27, no. 2 (2018): 416–425.
|
| [20] |
L. Lippa, L. Lippa, and F. Cacciola, “Loss of Cervical Lordosis: What Is the Prognosis?,” Journal of Craniovertebral Junction and Spine 8, no. 1 (2017): 9–14.
|
| [21] |
I. Alam, R. Sharma, S. A. Borkar, R. Goda, V. Katiyar, and S. S. Kale, “Factors Predicting Loss of Cervical Lordosis Following Cervical Laminoplasty: A Critical Review,” Journal of Craniovertebral Junction and Spine 11, no. 3 (2020): 163–168.
|
| [22] |
T. Fujishiro, S. Hayama, T. Obo, et al., “Gap Between Flexion and Extension Ranges of Motion: A Novel Indicator to Predict the Loss of Cervical Lordosis After Laminoplasty in Patients With Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy,” Journal of Neurosurgery. Spine 35, no. 1 (2021): 8–17.
|
| [23] |
J. K. Lee, S. J. Hyun, and K. J. Kim, “Optimizing Surgical Strategy for Cervical Spinal Deformity: Global Alignment and Surgical Targets,” Neurospine 20, no. 4 (2023): 1246–1255.
|
RIGHTS & PERMISSIONS
2026 The Author(s). Orthopaedic Surgery published by Tianjin Hospital and John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd.
PDF
(539KB)
