Skip to main content

Table 3 Data on Patients With Ossification of Ligamentum Fluvam

From: Thoracic myelopathy caused by ossification of ligamentum flavum of which fluorosis as an etiology factor

case no. sex & age DPS & group JOA score levels & segment number of OLF levels & number of decompression recovery rate %
    pre-operation follow up    
    LEM TS LES SD Total LEM TS LES SD total    
1 M, 42 15m(2) 2 2 0 1 5 4 2 1 2 9 T12–L1 (1) T12–L1 (2) 67
2 M,62 3d(1) 3 2 1 3 9 4 2 1 3 10 T12–L1 (1) T12–L1 (2) 50
3 F, 46 32m(2) 3 1 1 2 7 4 2 1 3 10 T12–L1 (1) T12–L1 (2) 75
4 M,54 12m(2) 4 1 1 3 9 4 2 2 3 11 C7–T1(1) C7–T1(2) 100
5 F,64 4y(2) 2 1 1 2 6 4 2 1 3 10 T1–4(3) T1–4(4) 80
6 M,51 5y(3) 1 1 0 2 4 3 2 1 3 9 T3–5(2) T3–5(3) 71
7 M,42 2d(1) 1 1 0 1 3 2 2 1 2 7 T7–12(5) T7–12(6) 50
8 M,65 7y(3) 1 1 1 1 4 3 1 1 1 6 T8–L1(5) T8–T12(5) 29
9 M,55 11y(3) 2 1 1 3 7 2 2 1 3 8 T7–L1(5) T8–L1(6) 25
10 F,56 15m(2) 2 1 1 2 6 3 2 1 2 8 T9–L1(4) T10–L1(4) 40
11 M,59 1d(1) 2 1 0 1 4 2 1 0 1 4 T9–L1(4) T9–L1(5) 0
12 M,45 6m(2) 4 2 1 3 10 4 2 2 3 11 T10–L1(3) T10–L1(4) 100
13 F,50 5y(3) 2 2 1 1 6 3 2 1 2 8 T10–L1(3) T10–L1(4) 40
14* M,62 1d(1) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 T10–L1(3) T10–L1(4) 0
15 M,50 18m(2) 2 2 1 3 8 4 2 2 3 11 T10–L1(3) T10–L1(4) 100
16* F,48 5y(3) 2 1 1 2 6 2 1 1 2 6 T10–L1(3) T10–L1(4) 0
17 M,54 1d(1) 0 1 0 1 2 0 1 0 2 3 T3–7   11
              T10–L1(4+3) T10–L1(4)  
18 M,59 8y(3) 2 1 1 2 6 4 2 1 2 9 T1–T5 T1–T5(5) 60
              T9–L1(4+4)   
19 M,58 7y(3) 1 0 0 1 2 2 1 1 2 6 T1–6   44
              T9–L1(5+4) T9–L1(5)  
20 M,56 6d(1) 2 1 1 1 5 3 1 1 2 7 C7–T9(9) C7–T4(5) 33
21 F,52 7m(2) 2 1 1 2 6 4 2 2 3 11 T8–12(4) T8–12(5) 100
22 F,72 7y(3) 2 2 1 1 6 4 2 1 2 9 T9–11 T9–11 60
              L3–S1(2+3) L3–S1(3+4)  
23 M,58 4y(2) 1 1 0 2 4 3 2 1 2 8 C3–6 C3–6 57
              T10–L1(4+3) T10–L1(4+4)  
  1. DPS: duration of preoperative symptom. LEM: lower extremity motor; TS: trunk sensory; LES: lower extremity sensory; SD: sphincter dysfunction Paired t test showed that there is significant difference between the JOA score of pre-operation and followed up (P = 0.0001). The mean recover rate is 51.83%. ANOVA analysis of the three groups according to the DPS showed p = 0.0003. Further t test showed that there was significant different between group one and group tow (P = 0.0004). There was significant different between group two and group three (P = 0.003). However, there was no significant different between group one and group three (P = 0.197).