Aims. Surgical approaches to cervical ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament (OPLL) remain controversial. The purpose of the present study was to analyze and compare the long-term neurological recovery following anterior decompression with fusion (ADF) and posterior laminectomy and fusion with bone graft and internal fixation (PLF) based on > ten-year follow-up outcomes in a single centre. Methods. Included in this retrospective cohort study were 48 patients (12 females; mean age 55.79 years (SD 8.94)) who were diagnosed with cervical OPLL, received treatment in our centre, and were followed up for 10.22 to 15.25 years. Of them, 24 patients (six females; mean age 52.88 years (SD 8.79)) received ADF, and the other 24 patients (five females; mean age 56.25 years (SD 9.44)) received PLF. Clinical data including age, sex, and the OPLL canal-occupying ratio were analyzed and compared. The primary outcome was Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) score, and the secondary outcome was visual analogue scale neck pain. Results. Compared with the baseline, neurological function improved significantly after surgery in all patients of both groups (p < 0.001). The JOA recovery rate in the ADF group was significantly higher than that in the PLF group (p < 0.001). There was no significant difference in postoperative cervical pain between the two groups (p = 0.387). The operating time was longer and intraoperative blood loss was greater in the PLF group than the ADF group. More complications were observed in the ADF group than in the PLF group, although the difference was not statistically significant. Conclusion. Long-term neurological function improved significantly after surgery in both groups, with the improvement more pronounced in the ADF group. There was no significant difference in postoperative neck pain between the two groups. The operating time was shorter and intraoperative blood loss was lower in the ADF group; however, the incidence of perioperative complications was higher. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2024;5(9):768–775