Abstract
BackgroundThe C0 to C2 region is the keystone for range of motion in the upper cervical spine. Posterior procedures usually include a fusion of at least one segment. Atlantoaxial fusion (AAF) only inhibits any motion in the C1/C2 segment whereas occipitocervical fusion (OCF) additionally interferes with the C0/C1 segment.The purpose of our study was to investigate clinical outcome of patients that underwent OCF or AAF for upper cervical spine injuries.MethodsOver a 5-year period (2010–2015), consecutive patients with upper cervical spine disorders were retrospectively identified as having been treated with OCF or AAF. The Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS) and the Neck Disability Index (NDI) were used to evaluate postoperative neck pain and health restrictions. Demographics, follow-up, and clinical outcome parameters were evaluated. Infection, hematoma, screw malpositioning, and deaths were used as complication variables. Follow-up was at least 6 months postoperatively.ResultsNinety-six patients (male = 42, female = 54) underwent stabilization of the upper cervical spine. OCF was performed in 44 patients (45.8%), and 52 patients (54.2%) were treated with AAF. Patients with OCF were diagnosed with more comorbidities (p = 0.01). Follow-up was shorter in the OCF group compared to the AAF group (6.3 months and 14.3 months; p = 0.01). No differences were found related to infection (OCF 4.5%; AAF 7.7%) and revision rate (OCF 13.6%; AAF 17.3%; p > 0.05). Regarding bother and disability, no differences were discovered utilizing the NDI score (AAF 21.4%; OCF 37.4%; p > 0.05). A reduction of disability measured by the NDI was observed with greater follow-up for all patients (p = 0.01).ConclusionTheoretically, AAF provides greater range of motion by preserving the C0/C1 motion segment resulting in less disability. The current study did not show any significant differences regarding clinical outcome measured by the NDI compared to OCF. No differences were found regarding complication and infection rates in both groups. Both techniques provide a stable treatment with comparable clinical outcome.
Highlights
The C0 to C2 region is the keystone for range of motion in the upper cervical spine
The involved patients were retrospectively identified from the clinics database based on a computer query of Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes for fractures of the upper cervical spine
Between 2010 and 2015 106 (male: n = 47 (44.3%), female: n = 59 (55.7%)), patients were treated for upper cervical spine injuries
Summary
The C0 to C2 region is the keystone for range of motion in the upper cervical spine. Atlantoaxial fusion (AAF) only inhibits any motion in the C1/C2 segment whereas occipitocervical fusion (OCF) interferes with the C0/C1 segment. The purpose of our study was to investigate clinical outcome of patients that underwent OCF or AAF for upper cervical spine injuries. The craniocervical junction represents a complex anatomical region consisting of two essential joints, the atlanto-occipital joint and the atlantoaxial joint [1]. Mobility of the cervical spine is complex and requires a combination of individual vertebral motion segments. Injuries to the upper cervical spine represent a serious entity including a wide spectrum of pathology ranging from benign to life threatening [1]. Various methods of fixation and/or fusion for upper cervical spine disorders have been described and successfully performed [10,11,12]
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
