Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jul 12, 2025
Evaluation of Patients' Posture and Gait Profile After Lumbar Fusion Surgery by Video Rasterstereography and Treadmill Gait Analysis
Published on: March 23, 2019
Gait function assessed using 3D gait analysis in patients with cervical spinal myelopathy before and after surgical
Filippo Mandelli1, Yuancheng Zhang2, Corina Nüesch3
1Department of Spine Surgery, University Hospital Basel, Spitalstrasse 21, Basel, 4031, Switzerland.
Background:
Degenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM) is the most common cause of cervical spinal cord dysfunction in adults and the result of chronic degenerative changes of the cervical spine. The compression of the spinal cord can lead to ischemia, inflammation, and neuronal apoptosis with a consequent impairment of the neurological function. Gait impairment is one of the most frequent signs of DCM.
Purpose:
To investigate the changes in spatio-temporal gait parameters assessed using 3D gait analysis in patients affected by DCM compared with healthy controls and the effect of surgical decompression on these parameters.
Study Design/Setting:
Systematic review and meta-analysis.
Patient Sample:
The meta-analysis included 267 patients with DCM and 276 healthy controls.
Outcome Measures:
Spatio-temporal parameters of gait were assessed. The primary outcome was gait speed; the secondary outcomes were cadence, stride length, step width, stride time, single-limb support time, and double-limb support time.
Methods:
Studies reporting spatial and/or temporal gait parameters measured using 3D gait analysis in patients with DCM were included. Data sources were Embase, Medline, and the Core Collection of Web of Science. Meta-analyses were performed to investigate the influence of surgical decompression in patients measured before and after surgery as well as to compare gait parameters of patients with DCM with controls.
Results:
Thirteen studies reporting on 267 patients with DCM and 276 healthy controls met the inclusion criteria. Seven studies compared patients with DCM with healthy controls, three studies compared gait in patients with DCM before and after surgical decompression, and three studies performed both comparisons. Compared with healthy controls, patients with DCM had slower gait speed (Standardized Mean Difference (SMD), -1.49; 95% confidence interval (CI) [-1.86; -1.13]; p<.001), lower cadence (SMD, -0.78; 95%CI [-1.00; -0.56]; p<.001), shorter stride length (SMD, -1.27; 95%CI [-1.53, -1.01]; p<.001), greater step width (SMD, 0.98; 95%CI [0.42, 1.54]; p=.003), longer stride time (SMD, 0.77; 95%CI [0.37, 1.16]; p=.009), single-limb support phase (SMD, -0.68; 95%CI [-1.06; -0.29]; p=.011), and double-limb support phase (SMD 0.84; 95%CI [0.35, 1.32]; p=.012). After surgical decompression, patients with DCM showed an improvement in gait speed (SMD, 0.57 (95%CI [0.29; 0.85]; p=.003) and no significant differences in other spatio-temporal parameters.
Conclusions:
Patients with DCM have clearly different spatio-temporal gait parameters than healthy controls. Gait speed is the only spatio-temporal gait parameter that improves significantly after surgical decompression suggesting that gait speed may be an important clinical outcome parameter in patients with DCM.
