Implantation of the anterior atlantoaxial lateral mass intervertebral cage using the transoral approach

Facet-occiput slope angle: A novel predictor of cage placement feasibility during surgery in basilar invagination patients

Background and aim

Direct posterior reduction and manipulation of the C1-2 joints, accompanied by placement of spacers, is the state-of-the-art technique for treating basilar invagination (BI) and atlantoaxial dislocation (AAD). The hindrance of occiput to reaching up to the true atlantoaxial facets (AAF) during the surgery remains challenging for cage placement. The aim of this study was to explore an objective and precise method of measuring the effect of the hindrance of occiput to reaching up to the true AAF and cage placement during surgery.

Method

We collected the clinico-imaging data of 58 patients with BI and AAD (Group A) who underwent surgery in our hospital, and 78 control cohorts (Group B) were retrieved retrospectively. We measured facet-occiput slope angle (FOSA) in midsagittal CT. Patients were positioned prone for surgery based on preoperative flexion O-C2a, and access to the true AAF was observed intraoperatively. The cut-off value of FOSA for the feasibility of cage placement in BI and AAD patients was appointed when access to the true AAF was impossible due to the hindrance of occiput during surgery.

Results

The cut-off value of FOSA for the feasibility of cage placement was 34o with an area under the curve AUC of 0.800 (95 % CI: 0.672-0.928, P < 0.001) and the Youden index of 0.607. In patients with FOSA >34o, reaching up to the true AAF and 3D-printed cage placement was impossible. FOSA was negative in Group A and positive in Group B, significantly larger in females compared to males in both groups and significantly larger postoperatively in Group A.

Conclusion

FOSA can objectively measure the feasibility of cage placement when the patient is positioned prone per preoperative flexion O-C2a. A FOSA >34o is contraindication for cage placement.

Intraarticular bone grafting in atlantoaxial facet joints via a posterior approach: nonstructural or structural-a minimum 24-month follow-up

Objective

To investigate the necessity of nonstructural or structural intraarticular bone grafting in atlantoaxial facet joints via a posterior approach and the influence by the presence of basilar invagination (BI).

Methods

From November 2016 to October 2018, patients who underwent posterior atlantoaxial or occipitocervical arthrodesis surgery at one institute were retrospectively reviewed. Operation records, preoperative and postoperative clinical status, and radiological films were analyzed.

Results

Thirty-three patients (19 without BI, 14 with BI) underwent posterior facet joint release followed by intraarticular bone grafting were enrolled finally. Twenty-four nonstructural (15 without BI, 9 with BI) and 9 structural (4 without BI, 5 with BI) grafting were performed. The average follow-up was 32.15±6.73 months (24–47 months). Among them, 1 (3.03%) implant failure occurred, and 32 (96.97%) achieved satisfactory neurological outcomes, including 28 (84.85%) complete and 4 (12.12%) acceptable reductions with complete fusion within 6 months. For patients without BI, structural and nonstructural grafting showed no significant difference in terms of reduction maintenance (100% vs 73.33%, p = 0.530), while for those with BI, structural grafting significantly increased the postoperative height of the joint space (5.67±1.22 mm vs 3.43±1.78 mm, p = 0.002) and maintained it much better than nonstructural grafting (88.89% vs 20.00%, p = 0.023), contributing notably to BI correction.

Conclusion

Intraarticular structural bone grafting in atlantoaxial facet joints has the advantage of maintaining anterior column height in the case of lateral mass collapse or when BI correction is needed; otherwise, nonstructural bone grafting is enough.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13018-021-02630-z.

Surgical treatment for basilar invagination with irreducible atlantoaxial dislocation: transoral atlantoaxial reduction plate fixation vs occipitocervical fixation

BACKGROUND

Transoral atlantoaxial reduction plate (TARP) fixation or occipitocervical fixation (OF) is an effective treatment for basilar invagination (BI) with irreducible atlantoaxial dislocation (IAAD). But, all current clinical studies involved a single surgical procedure. The clinical effects of TARP and OF operation for BI with IAAD have yet to be compared. We therefore present this report to compare the treatment of TARP and OF procedure for BI with IAAD.

METHODS

Fifty-six patients with BI with IAAD who underwent TARP or OF operation from June 2011 to June 2017 were retrospectively analyzed. Among these, 35 patients underwent TARP operation (TARP group), and 21 patients underwent OF operation (OF group). We compared the difference of clinical, radiological, and surgical outcomes between the TARP and OF groups postoperatively.

RESULTS

Compared with OF group, the operative time and blood loss in TARP group were lower. There was no statistical difference in the atlantodental interval (ADI), clivus canal angle (CCA), cervicomedullary angle (CMA), distance between the top of the odontoid process and the Chamberlain line (CL) and Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) score between the TARP and OF groups preoperatively, but the improvements of these parameters in the TARP group were superior to those in the OF group postoperatively. The fusion rates were higher in the TARP group than those in the OF group at the early stage postoperatively.

CONCLUSIONS

TARP and OF operations are effective surgical treatment for BI with IAAD, but the performance of reduction and decompression and earlier bone fusion rates of TARP procedure are superior to those of OF.