Abstract
Klippel-Feil Syndrome (KFS) is described as the clinical triad of short neck, low posterior hairline, and limitation of neck mobility.
Topresent our clinical experience with KFS patients who also had adjacent segment disease (ASD) and to propose a novel classification system for these patients.
This retrospective study was performed in the neurosurgery department of our tertiary care center. Data were gathered using the medical records of 22 KFS patients (10 males, 12 females) with ASD. Diagnosis was confirmed with imaging modalities including X-ray, computerized tomography, and magnetic resonance imaging. Clinical and radiological findings as well as therapeutic outcomes were noted.
The average age of our series was 56.09 (range: 41 to 67) years. The operative technique was selected as for our novel Yilmaz-Yucesoy Classification System . Accordingly, one patient (4.54 %) received non-surgical treatment (Yilmaz-Yucesoy Grade 1), six cases (27.27 %) underwent anterior cervical arthroplasty, seven patients (31.81 %) underwent anterior cervical discectomy or corpectomy and fusion with cervical cage and plate (Yilmaz-Yucesoy Grade 3). Eight patients (36.36 %) with cervical spinal instability had anterior cervical discectomy or corpectomy and fusion with cervical cage and plate (Yilmaz-Yucesoy Grade 4). No mortality or remarkable complications were detected.
Appropriate and timely recognition and classification of patients with KFS and ASD based on our newly proposed Yilmaz-Yucesoy Classification System yielded promising treatment outcomes. However, further prospective, randomized, controlled trials are warranted on larger series to validate our preliminary results.
Author Contributions
Copyright© 2021
Yilmaz Murat, et al.
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Competing interests The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
Funding Interests:
Citation:
Introduction
Klippel-Feil Syndrome (KFS) is a relatively rare disorder that was initially described by Maurice Klippel and Andre Feil in 1912. The vast majority of KFS cases are sporadic, but there are several genetic types of KFS. Conventionally, KFS is described as having the clinical triad of a short neck, low posterior hairline, and restriction of neck motion, which may be attributed to the fusion of cervical vertebrae.1,3,5 However, many patients do not typically display the conventional triad of KFS. The vertebral column is comprised of fibrocartilagenous intervertebral discs and ossified vertebral units. Congenital malformations of the vertebral column involve kyphosis, scoliosis, spina bifida, and KFS. In general, cervical spinal deformity increases with the increasing number of segments involved and these patients are more likely to present with concomitant congenital problems. The relationship between KFS and degenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM) has not been well defined, despite reports of segmental hypermobility and predisposition to KFS patients' degenerative changes in the cervical region. Since the patients with spinal fusion may be at risk for adjacent segment disease, there is a need for investigation of KFS patients for the tendency to develop neurological sequelae due to the degeneration of the neighboring segment. In this study, we aimed to share our experience with 22 patients who were treated for adjacent segment disease (ASD) associated with KFS. We describe the clinical and radiological findings together with our treatment outcomes and we propose “Yilmaz-Yucesoy Classification System” as a novel grading system for KFS with ASD based on our data along with a brief review of current literature.
Results
A total of 22 KFS patients (10 males, 12 females) with ASD met the eligibility criteria for the current study. The average age of our series was 56.09 (range 41 to 67) years. The anatomical locations of the lesions, clinical data of the patients, and treatment modalities are presented in (Abbreviations: M: male; F: female; OPLL: ossification of posterior longitudinal ligament; PEEK: polyetheretherketone; mJOA: modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association Scale) The combined imaging modalities were employed to confirm the diagnosis of KFS and patients were initially graded according to the Samartzis Classification System ( The operative technique was selected concerning our novel “Yilmaz-Yucesoy Classification System” ( Spinal cord intensity changes were found in seventeen (77.27 %) patients in the MRI. The preoperative and postoperative condition of the patients was assessed with the modified Japanese Orthopaedic Association Scale (mJOA).
Case no.
Age
Sex
Pre-operative mJOA
Post-operative mJOA
Samartzis Type
KFS segment(s)
Adjacent segment disease(s) and level(s)
Izmir Classification System Grade
Operative technique
1
60
M
15
17
Type 2
C3-4, C4-5
C4-5 spinal stenosis
Grade 3
Anterior, C5-6 discectomy and C5-6 instrumented fusion (PEEK cage and plate)
2
51
F
11
15
Type 1
C5-6
C4-5 spinal stenosis
Grade 2
Anterior, C4-5 discectomy and arthroplasty
3
66
M
12
15
Type 1
C5-6
C6-7 spondylolisthesis
Grade 4
Anterior, C6-7 discectomy and C6-7 instrumented fusion (PEEK cage and plate)
4
41
F
14
16
Type 1
C3-4
C5-6 spondylolisthesis
Grade 4
Anterior, C6-7 discectomy and C6-7 instrumented fusion (PEEK cage and plate)
5
55
M
13
15
Type 1
C6-7
C4-5, C5-6 spinal tenosis
Grade 3
Anterior; C4 and C5 corpectomy and C3-6 instrumented fusion (mesh cage and plate)
6
46
M
15
17
Type 1
C6-7
C4-5, C5-6 spinal stenosis
Grade 3
Anterior, C4-5 and C5-6 discectomy and C4-6 instrumented fusion (PEEK cage and plate)
7
66
F
14
17
Type 1
C6-7
C4-5, C5-6 spinal stenosis
Grade 3
Anterior, C4-5 and C5-6 discectomy and C4-6 instrumented fusion (PEEK 17cage and plate)
8
61
M
15
17
Type 1
C5-6, C6-7
C4-5 spinal stenosis
Grade 3
Anterior, C4-5 discectomy and C4-5 instrumented fusion (PEEK cage and plate)
9
67
F
12
15
Type 1
C5-6
C4-5 spinal stenosis
Grade 2
Anterior, C4-5 discectomy and arthroplasty
10
44
F
17
17
Type 1
C3-4
C4-5, C5-C6 spinal stenosis
Grade 3
Anterior, C5 corpectomy and C4-C6 instrumented fusion (mesh cage and plate)
11
59
M
15
16
Type 1
C5-6
C4-5 spinal stenosis
Grade 2
Anterior, C4-5 discectomy and arthroplasty
12
54
F
15
15
Type 3
C4-C5,C5-6, C7-T1
C3-4 spinal stenosis and spondylolisthesis
Grade 4
Anterior, C4-5 discectomy and instrumented fusion (PEEK cage and plate)
13
58
M
15
14
Type 1
C5-6
C6-7 spinal stenosis and spondylolisthesis
Grade 4
Anterior, C6-7 discectomy and instrumented fusion (PEEK cage and plate)
14
54
M
15
15
Type 2
C5-6, C6-7
C4-5 spinal stenosis and spondylolisthesis
Grade 4
Anterior, C4-5 discectomy and instrumented fusion (PEEK cage and plate)
15
61
M
16
16
Type 1
C6-7
C4-5 spinal stenosis
Grade 2
Anterior, C4-5 discectomy and arthroplasty
16
48
F
16
18
Type 1
C6-7
C5-6 spinal stenosis
Grade 2
Anterior, C4-5 discectomy and arthroplasty
17
65
M
15
17
Type 1
C6-7
C3-4 and C5-6 spinal stenosis
Grade 3
Anterior, C3-4 discectomy and instrumented fusion (PEEK cage) and C5-6 discectomy and arthroplasty
18
57
F
14
16
Type 1
C5-6
C3-4, C4-5 spinal stenosis and OPLL (needs corpectomy)
Grade 4
Anterior, C5 corpectomy and C4-C6 instrumented fusion (otogen graft and plate)
19
62
F
14
16
Type 2
C4-5, C5-6, C6-7
C3-4 spinal stenosis and spondylolisthesis
Grade 4
Anterior, C3-4 discectomy and instrumented fusion (PEEK cage and plate)
20
53
F
16
18
Type 1
C4-5
C5-6 spinal stenosis
Grade 2
Anterior, C4-5 discectomy and arthroplasty
21
56
F
18
18
Type 1
C6-7
C5-6 spinal stenosis
Grade 1
No surgical intervention
22
50
F
17
17
Type 1
C3-4
C2-3 spinal stenosis
Grade 4
Posterior, C2 and C3 laminoplasty
Type
Definition
I
Single-level fusion
II
Multiple, non-contagious fusion
III
Multiple, contagious fused segments
Grade
Radiological diagnosis of KFS
Radiological instability
Clinical finding(s)
Additional information
Treatment
1
+
-
-
-
Conservative, symptom driven, muscle strengthening
2
+
-
+
-
Discectomy, arthoplasty
3
+
-
+
Spinal stenosis involving more than 2 levels. At least 2 level discectomy or corpectomy needed due to OPLL or osteophyte formation.
Multilevel discectomy with cage or corpectomy and instrumented fusion with cage and plate)
4
+
+
+
If necessary, posterior laminectomy and stabilization or laminoplasty can be employed.
Discectomy and fusion with cage and cervical plate or corpectomy and instrumented fusion with cage and plate, and/ or laminectomy and screw- rod fixation.
Discussion
This study was performed to present our clinical experience with a series of KFS patients with concomitant ASD. Based on our clinical, diagnostic, and therapeutic data, we propose a new classification system that can be used to recognize the patients accurately and to tailor the appropriate treatment strategy in order to optimize the treatment outcomes. Evaluation of KFS patients necessitates a complete and detailed physical examination. This disorder can be accompanied by various pathologies such as Sprengel s Deformity, Duane Syndrome, renal agenesis, Wildervanck Syndrome, renal, vascular, and cardiac malformations. Notably, nearly half of KFS patients may suffer from concurrent scoliosis and atlantoaxial instability. Possible multisystemic involvement and syndromic presentation must be remembered in KFS patients with ASD. Therefore, a multidisciplinary approach and close collaboration between various branches are crucial in the evaluation of these patients and particularly candidates for surgical treatment. Congenital fusion of cervical vertebrae, such as KFS, is a possible risk factor for the development of degenerative cervical myelopathy (DCM). KFS can present in a wide phenotype spectrum and its impact on the quality of life is associated with the severity of the condition, accompanying deformity, and the possibility for compression of spinal cord and myelopathy. Typically, the cervical spinal deformity increases in parallel with the number of levels involved. Patients with KFS are prone to the development of cervical joint degeneration. Even though the mechanism for this association is still obscure, the increased biomechanical stress on nonfused segments may be contributory. The exclusion of patients with idiopathic cervical fusion (ICF) of vertebrae who did not demonstrate the typical wasp-waist sign associated with KFS was based on the assumption that none of these subjects displayed any signs of degenerative changes at the fused level. It must be remembered that ICF may constitute a distinct clinical entity rather than simply representing a broader spectrum of phenotypes associated with KFS. The relationship between KFS and DCM has not been completely elucidated but there are reports indicating segmental hypermobility and a tendency for degenerative changes in the cervical spine of patients with KFS. Limited mobility, usually due to bone and soft tissue restrictions associated with KFS, may lead to excessive movement and shear stress in unfused segments that may appear clinically as degenerative disc disease later in life. Operative management strategies have included arthrodesis and stabilization of the cervical spine. Other surgical treatment options have been attempted, including cervical disc replacement, in order to restore physiological movement and take action on further loss of motion and development of adjacent segment disease. The literature has noted that up to half of KFS cases may not present with typical findings such as wasp-waist sign and the reason behind such assertions remains speculative. The strengths of the current study involve data integrity and adequate duration of follow-up. However, limitations such as retrospective design, data restricted to the experience of a single-center, and possible confounding effects of ethnic, genetic, and socioenvironmental factors must be remembered during extrapolation of our data to larger populations.
Conclusion
In conclusion, recognition and classification of KFS patients with ASD is critical for the establishment of diagnosis accurately and tailoring the individualized treatment strategy without delay. Our preliminary data yielded that the novel “Yilmaz-Yucesoy Classification System” can be useful to categorize these patients and to optimize therapeutic outcomes. However, further multi-centric, prospective, randomized trials on larger series are warranted to confirm and validate our newly proposed classification system.