scholarly journals Wright's Technique with the Addition of Visualized Axial Cortical Windows in Odontoid Fractures

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ben Wang ◽  
Jie Jin ◽  
Zhen‐xuan Shao ◽  
Guang‐yong Yang ◽  
Yan Lin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
1985 ◽  
Vol &NA; (193) ◽  
pp. 178???183 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. W. PEPIN ◽  
R. B. BOURNE ◽  
R. J. HAWKINS

Injury ◽  
2005 ◽  
Vol 36 (2) ◽  
pp. S54-S64 ◽  
Author(s):  
Germán Ochoa

Spine ◽  
2010 ◽  
Vol 35 (Supplement) ◽  
pp. S209-S218 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alpesh A. Patel ◽  
Ron Lindsey ◽  
Jason T. Bessey ◽  
Jens Chapman ◽  
Raja Rampersaud

2006 ◽  
Vol 6 (5) ◽  
pp. 529-533 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kai-Uwe Lewandrowski ◽  
Paul P. Park ◽  
Jeffrey M. Baron ◽  
Stephen L. Curtin

2017 ◽  
Vol 2017 ◽  
pp. 1-7 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anna-Lena Robinson ◽  
Anders Möller ◽  
Yohan Robinson ◽  
Claes Olerud

The currently available data on the distribution of C2 fracture subtypes is sparse. This study was designed to identify the proportions of the second cervical vertebra (C2) fracture subtypes and to present age and gender specific incidences of subgroups. A dataset of all patients treated between 2002 and 2014 for C2 fractures was extracted from the regional hospital information system. C2 fractures were classified into odontoid fractures types 1, 2, and 3, Hangman’s fractures types 1, 2, and 3, and atypical C2 fractures. 233 patients (female 51%, age 72±19 years) were treated for a C2 fracture. Odontoid fractures were found in 183 patients, of which 2 were type 1, 127 type 2, and 54 type 3, while 26 of C2 fractures were Hangman’s fractures and 24 were atypical C2 fractures. In the geriatric subgroup 89% of all C2 fractures were odontoid, of which 71% were type 2 and 29% type 3. There was an increasing incidence of odontoid fractures types 2 and 3 from 2002 to 2014. 40% of C2 fractures were treated surgically. This study presents reliable subset proportions of C2 fractures in a prospectively collected regional cohort. Knowledge of these proportions facilitates future epidemiological studies of C2 fractures.


2021 ◽  
pp. 1-11

OBJECTIVE Posterior C1–2 fixation without fusion makes it possible to restore atlantoaxial motion after removing the implant, and it has been used as an alternative technique for odontoid fractures; however, the long-term efficacy of this technique remains uncertain. The purpose of the present study was to explore the long-term follow-up outcomes of patients with odontoid fractures who underwent posterior C1–2 fixation without fusion. METHODS A retrospective study was performed on 62 patients with type II/III fresh odontoid fractures who underwent posterior C1–2 fixation without fusion and were followed up for more than 5 years. The patients were divided into group A (23 patients with implant removal) and group B (39 patients without implant removal) based on whether they underwent a second surgery to remove the implant. The clinical outcomes were recorded and compared between the two groups. In group A, the range of motion (ROM) of C1–2 was calculated, and correlation analysis was performed to explore the factors that influence the ROM of C1–2. RESULTS A solid fracture fusion was found in all patients. At the final follow-up, no significant difference was found in visual analog scale score or American Spinal Injury Association Impairment Scale score between the two groups (p > 0.05), but patients in group A had a lower Neck Disability Index score and milder neck stiffness than did patients in group B (p < 0.05). In group A, 87.0% (20/23) of the patients had atlantoodontoid joint osteoarthritis at the final follow-up. In group A, the C1–2 ROM in rotation was 6.1° ± 4.5° at the final follow-up, whereas the C1–2 ROM in flexion-extension was 1.8° ± 1.2°. A negative correlation was found between the C1–2 ROM in rotation and the severity of tissue injury in the atlantoaxial region (r = –0.403, p = 0.024) and the degeneration of the atlantoodontoid joint (r = –0.586, p = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS Posterior C1–2 fixation without fusion can be used effectively for the management of fresh odontoid fractures. The removal of the implant can further improve the clinical efficacy, but satisfactory atlantoaxial motion cannot be maintained for a long time after implant removal. A surgeon should reconsider the contribution of posterior C1–2 fixation without fusion and secondary implant removal in preserving atlantoaxial mobility for patients with fresh odontoid fractures.


2016 ◽  
Vol 6 (1_suppl) ◽  
pp. s-0036-1582712-s-0036-1582712
Author(s):  
Jamil Farhat Neto ◽  
José Carlos Esteves Veiga ◽  
Jefferson Walter Daniel

1999 ◽  
Vol 81-B (3) ◽  
pp. 472-477 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. D. Henry ◽  
J. Bohly ◽  
A. Grosse
Keyword(s):  

2017 ◽  
Vol 2017 ◽  
pp. 1-4 ◽  
Author(s):  
L. Leitner ◽  
C. I. Brückmann ◽  
M. M. Gilg ◽  
G. Bratschitsch ◽  
P. Sadoghi ◽  
...  

Purpose. Anterior screw fixation has become a popular surgical treatment method for instable odontoid fractures. Screw loosening and migration are a rare, severe complication following anterior odontoid fixation, which can lead to esophagus perforation and requires revision operation. Methods. We report a case of screw loosening and migration after anterior odontoid fixation, which perforated the esophagus and was excreted without complications in a 78-year-old male patient. Results. A ventral dislocated anterior screw perforated through the esophagus after eight years after implantation and was excreted through the gastrointestinal (GI) tract. At a 6-month follow-up after the event the patient was asymptomatic. Conclusion. Extrusion via the GI tract is not safe enough to be considered as a treatment option for loosened screws. Some improvements could be implemented to prevent such an incident. Furthermore, this case is a fine example that recent preoperative imaging is mandatory before revision surgery for screw loosening.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document