The management of bilateral interfacetal dislocation with anterior fixation in cervical spine : comparison with combined antero-posterior fixation

Surgery for subaxial cervical spine injuries: which is better: anterior, posterior, or anterior-posterior combined approach?: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Both anterior and posterior approaches have shown insignificant differences in good clinical outcomes with one over another advantages and disadvantages. This review aimed to provide evidence for the best management of subaxial cervical spine injuries and discuss the clinical outcomes and complications. Clinical studies of anterior versus posterior and anterior versus anterior-posterior (combined) approaches to subaxial cervical spine injury were searched electronically from PubMed, Medline, ScienceDirect, Cochrane Library, and other Internet databases. Clinical improvement, complication rates, and mortality rates showed no significant differences with an odds ratio of 1.09 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.79-1.49; p=0.61) for the anterior versus posterior approach and an odds ratio of 1.05 (95% CI, 0.35-3.18; p=0.93) for the anterior versus the combined approach. Surgical duration and blood loss were significantly different between the anterior and posterior groups with a mean difference of -42.84 (95% CI, -64.39 to 21.29; p<0.0001); -212.91 (95% CI, -417.60 to 8.22; p=0.04), respectively, whereas the length of hospitalization did not (p=0.16). No difference was found between the groups when compared by clinical improvement and complication rate. Meanwhile, the anterior approach was superior to the posterior approach in terms of surgical duration, blood loss, and hospitalization length.

Outcome and complications of operatively treated subaxial cervical spine injuries: A population-based retrospective cohort study

Objective

The aim was to study the outcome and complications of operative treatment for subaxial cervical spine injuries with respect to injury morphology and surgical strategy.

Methods

A population-based cohort of 271 consecutive patients treated at Kuopio University Hospital from 2003 to 2018 was retrospectively reviewed.

Results

The mean age was 52.4 (range 12-90) years and 78.6% were male. The AOSpine morphological classification was C in 56.5%, B in 24.7% and A in 17.0% of cases. The surgical approach was anterior in 70.8%, posterior in 20.3% and combined in 8.9% of patients. Fixation alignment was maintained in 96.9% of patients. Instrumentation failures were observed only in patients operated anteriorly but no statistical difference was found between the surgical approaches. The American Spinal Injury Association Impairment Scale (AIS) grade improved in 22.1% of patients. Patients with preoperative AIS grade C had significant potential for neurological improvement (OR 10.44; 95% CI 1.77-61.56; p = 0.010). Postoperative, mostly mild, complications manifested in 22.5% of patients. The posterior approach was associated with fewer postoperative complications (OR 0.18; 95% CI 0.06-0.51; p = 0.001). Preoperative AIS grade A was a significant predisposing factor for complications (OR = 4.90; 95% CI = 1.49-16.10; p = 0.009). The perioperative (90-day) mortality rate was 3.3%. The mean follow-up period was 64.7 ± 25.9 (radiological)/136.7 ± 174.8 (clinical) days.

Conclusions

Operative treatment is safe and effective but the surgical approach should be patient- and injury-specific. The prognosis for neurological recovery from spinal cord injury is superior in patients with partially preserved motor function.

Reduction of Lower Cervical Facet Dislocation: A Review of All Techniques

Objective: The surgical treatment of lower cervical facet dislocation is controversial. Great advancements on reduction techniques for lower cervical facet dislocation have been made in the past decades. However, there is no article reviewing all the reduction techniques yet. The aim is to review the evolution and advancements of the reduction techniques for lower cervical facet dislocation.Methods: The application of all reduction techniques for lower cervical facet dislocation, including closed reduction, anterior-only, posterior-only, and combined approach reduction, is reviewed and discussed. Recent advancements on the novel techniques of reduction are also described. The principles of various techniques for reduction of cervical facet dislocation are described in detail.Results: All reduction techniques are useful. The anterior-only surgical approach appears to be the most popular approach. Moreover, many novel or modified reduction and fixation methods have been introduced in recent years.Conclusion: The selection of surgical approach depends on a combination of factors, including surgeon preference, patient factors, injury morphology, and inherent advantages and disadvantages of any given approach.

Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion with plate versus posterior screw fixation after traumatic subaxial fractures in octogenarians: complications and outcomes with a 2-year follow-up

INTRODUCTION

Surgical intervention for management of spinal instability after traumatic subaxial fractures in octogenarians requires a clear consensus on optimal treatments. This study aimed to provide a guide for more efficient management through comparison and assessment of clinical outcomes and complications of anterior cervical discectomy and fusion with plate (pACDF) and posterior decompression fusion (PDF) instrumentation alone in patients aged 80 years.

METHODS

A single institution retrospective review of electronic medical records was undertaken between September 2005 and December 2021. Comorbidities were assessed using the age-adjusted Charlson comorbidity index (CCI). Logistic regression was used to identify potential risk factors for ACDF complications.

RESULTS

The rate of comorbidities were similarly high between the pACDF (n=13) and PDF (n=15) groups (pACDF: 8.7 ± 2.4 points vs. 8.5 ± 2.3 points; p=0.555). Patients in the PDF group had significantly longer surgical duration (235 ± 58.4 min vs. 182.5 ± 32.1 min; p<0.001) and significantly higher volumes of intraoperative blood loss (661.5 ± 100.1 mL vs. 487.5 ± 92.1 mL; p<0.001). The in-hospital mortality was 7.7% for the pACDF group and 6.7% for the PDF group. On day 90, the mortality rate increased in both groups from baseline (pACDF: 15.4% vs. PDF: 13.3; p>0.05). Motor scores (MS) improved significantly after surgery in both groups (pACDF: preOP MS: 75.3 ± 11.1 vs. postOP MS: 82.4 ± 10.1; p<0.05; PDF: preOP MS: 80.7 ± 16.7 vs. postOP MS: 89.5 ± 12.1; p<0.05). Statistically significant predictors for postoperative complications included longer operative times (odds ratio 1.2, 95% confidence interval 1.1-2.1; p=0.005) and larger volume of blood loss (odds ratio 1.5, 95% confidence interval 1.2-2.2; p=0.003).

CONCLUSIONS

Both pACDF and PDF can be considered safe treatment strategies for octogenarians with a poor baseline profile and subaxial fractures as they lead to patients substantial neurological improvements, and they are accompanied with low morbidity and mortality rates. Operation duration and intraoperative blood loss should be minimized to increase the degree of neurological recovery in octogenarian patients.

Conundrum in surgical management of three-column injuries in sub-axial cervical spine: a systematic review and meta-analysis

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

PURPOSE

Three-column injuries making the spine unstable require adequate fixation which can be achieved by anterior alone, posterior alone or combined anterior-posterior approach. There is no general consensus till date on a single best approach in sub-axial cervical spine trauma. This study comparing the three approaches is an attempt to establish a firmer guideline in this disputed topic.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The protocol was registered with PROSPERO. PubMed, Embase and Google Scholar were searched for relevant literature. For each study, pre-defined data were extracted which included correction of kyphosis, loss of correction, hospital stay, operative time, blood loss during surgery as the outcome variables. Studies were also screened for the complications.

RESULTS

Eleven studies were evaluated for qualitative analysis and quantitative synthesis of the data in our review. The result demonstrated significant difference with most correction achieved in combined approach subgroup. Though no significant difference was found, the anterior group was having maximum loss of correction. Combined approach showed significantly more operative time and blood loss followed by posterior approach and then anterior approach alone. The improvement in VAS was significantly more in anterior subgroup when compared to combined approach.

CONCLUSION

Cervical alignment is best restored by combined approach compared to the other two. Anterior only approach showed more correction than posterior approach. However, there is no significant difference between all three approaches in loss of correction at long-term follow-up. Anterior only approach is superior to posterior and combined approach on basis of intraoperative and perioperative parameters.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE I

Diagnostic: individual cross-sectional studies with the consistently applied reference standard and blinding.

Comparison of anterior-only versus combined anterior and posterior fusion for unstable subaxial cervical injuries: a meta-analysis of biomechanical and clinical studies

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of the present study was to perform a meta-analysis comparing biomechanical and clinical outcomes between anterior-only and combined anterior and posterior fusions to determine which method of cervical fusion yielded better results for unstable cervical injuries.

METHODS

The MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Web of Science and SCOPUS electronic databases were searched for relevant articles published through 2000-2019 that compared the biomechanical and clinical outcomes of anterior-only and combined anterior and posterior fusion for unstable cervical fracture.

RESULTS

Eight biomechanical and four clinical studies were included in the analysis. There were significant biomechanical differences between the groups with respect to flexion-extension, axial rotation and lateral bending. Combined fusion provided better biomechanical stability for unstable cervical injuries than anterior-only fusion, regardless of the number of corpectomies or the presence of a posterior column injury. However, despite significant biomechanical differences, there were no significant differences in clinical outcomes, such as the degree of neurologic improvement and complications between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

Anterior-only and combined anterior and posterior fusions for unstable subaxial cervical injuries can both restore cervical stability. Although combined fusion might have some advantages in terms of stability biomechanically, there were no significant differences in clinical outcomes, such as the degree of neurologic improvement and perioperative complications. Therefore, rather than the routine use of combined fusion for unstable cervical injuries, the selective use of anterior-only or combined fusion according to the type of injury is recommended.

Is Anterior-Only Fixation Adequate for Three-Column Injuries of the Cervical Spine?

Study Design

Retrospective case series.

Purpose

To analyze the clinical and functional outcomes of patients who have undergone anterior cervical discectomy/corpectomy and fusion (ACDF/ACCF) for a three-column cervical spine injury (CSI).

Overview of Literature

The treatment of choice for a three-column CSI is an area of contention; however, combined anterior and posterior fixation is the preferred method explored in the literature. Studies have shown the superior biomechanical stability of posterior fixation over that of anterior fixation, but anterior-only approach in CSI has been proving its efficacy in recent times by providing reasonable stability with the maximum achievable decompression and fusion.

Methods

Twenty-one patients undergoing ACDF/ACCF with a bone graft/metallic cage treatment for cervical injuries involving all three columns from January 2016 to July 2018 were included in the study. All of the patients were followed up monthly for the first 3 months and then every 6 months, until their last follow-up visit.

Results

Nineteen patients had AO type C injuries and were managed with ACDF, and two patients with AO type B injuries were managed with ACCF. Fifteen had a complete spinal cord injury, while six had an incomplete spinal cord injury (American Spinal Injury Association B, C, and D). The mean segmental kyphosis at presentation of 12.2°±4.4° improved in the postoperative period to -7.2°±2.5°. At their final follow-up, all the patients showed clinical improvements when assessed by the Visual Analog Scale (6.8–1.8), Oswestry Disability Index score (59.7–34.9), and Spinal Cord Independence Measure score (24.8–36.4). One patient in the ACDF group needed a secondary posterior fixation because of instability.

Conclusions

An anterior approach to the cervical spine in cervical fracture dislocations is an effective treatment showing an optimal recovery rate in terms of patient-reported outcomes and structural stability, with the added advantages of less blood loss and the fact that the technique requires less instrumentation.

Polyetheretherketone Cage with Demineralized Bone Matrix Can Replace Iliac Crest Autografts for Anterior Cervical Discectomy and Fusion in Subaxial Cervical Spine Injuries

Objective

This study aimed to compare the clinical and radiologic outcomes of patients with subaxial cervical injury who underwent anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) with autologous iliac bone graft or polyetheretherketone (PEEK) cages using demineralized bone matrix (DBM).

Methods

From January 2005 to December 2010, 70 patients who underwent one-level ACDF with plate fixation for post-traumatic subaxial cervical spinal injury in a single institution were retrospectively investigated. Autologous iliac crest grafts were used in 33 patients (Group I), whereas 37 patients underwent ACDF using a PEEK cage filled with DBM (Group II). Plain radiographs were used to assess bone fusion, interbody height (IBH), segmental angle (SA), overall cervical sagittal alignment (CSA, C2–7 angle), and development of adjacent segmental degeneration (ASD). Clinical outcome was assessed using a visual analog scale (VAS) for pain and Frankel grade.

Results

The mean follow-up duration for patients in Group I and Group II was 28.9 and 25.4 months, respectively. All patients from both groups achieved solid fusion during the follow-up period. The IBH and SA of the fused segment and CSA in Group II were better maintained during the follow-up period. Nine patients in Group I and two patients in Group II developed radiologic ASD. There were no statistically significant differences in the VAS score and Frankel grade between the groups.

Conclusion

This study showed that PEEK cage filled with DBM, and plate fixation is at least as safe and effective as ACDF using autograft, with good maintenance of cervical alignment. With advantages such as no donor site morbidity and no graft-related complications, PEEK cage filled with DBM, and plate fixation provide a promising surgical option for treating traumatic subaxial cervical spine injuries.

Management of Neglected Traumatic Bilateral Cervical Facet Dislocations Without Neurological Deficit

Introduction:

Sub axial cervical spine dislocations are common and managing these cases by closed reduction is successful in the majority of cases. However, treatment of old and neglected cases is difficult and the results may vary in terms of neurological and functional outcomes.

Case Presentation:

We present two cases of traumatic bilateral cervical facet dislocation with no neurological deficit (ND) who referred four months after the injury. They were managed via single stage anterior discectomy, posterior facet reduction, instrumentation, and then anterior reconstruction with bone graft and cervical plate. The patients had no ND in the postoperative period and returned to work.

Discussion:

Patients presenting with neck pain after a history of trauma should be evaluated thoroughly with radiographs and computed tomography. The management of old neglected facet dislocations is difficult, lengthy, and fraught with potential neurological complications; operative intervention can substantially improve the quality of life in these patients.

A single-stage posterior approach with open reduction and pedicle screw fixation in subaxial cervical facet dislocations

OBJECT

The optimal treatment for cervical facet dislocations is controversial, but the generally accepted process recommends an initial closed reduction with the next step determined according to the success of the closed reduction and the presence of traumatic disc herniation. This study aimed to show the efficacy of a posterior approach performed with an open reduction and pedicle screw fixation with removal of disc particles, if required, in the management of subaxial cervical dislocations.

METHODS

Between March 2012 and September 2013, 21 consecutive patients with cervical facet dislocations were enrolled. The affected levels were as follows: 4 at C3–4; 2 at C4–5; 5 at C5–6; and 10 at the C6–7 level. Seven patients had traumatic disc herniations. Closed reduction was not attempted; a prompt posterior cervical surgery was performed instead. After open reduction, pedicle screw fixation was performed. In cases with traumatic disc herniation, herniated disc fragments were excised via a posterolateral approach and successful decompressions were determined by postoperative MRI studies. Clinical outcomes were assessed using the American Spinal Injury Association (ASIA) grading system. Radiological outcomes were assessed by comparing the degree of subluxation and the angle of segmental lordosis between pre- and postoperative CT scans.

RESULTS

All patients improved neurologically. The mean segmental angles improved from 7.3° ± 8.68° to −5.9° ± 4.85°. The mean subluxation improved from 23.4% ± 16.52% to 2.6% ± 7.19%. Disc fragments were successfully removed from the 7 patients with herniated discs, as shown on MRI.

CONCLUSIONS

Open reduction followed by pedicle screw fixation or posterolateral removal of herniated disc fragments is a good treatment option for cervical facet dislocations.

In vitro biomechanical evaluation of four fixation techniques for distractive-flexion injury stage 3 of the cervical spine

PURPOSE

Anterior plate fixation has been reported to provide satisfactory results in cervical spine distractive flexion (DF) injuries stages 1 and 2, but will result in a substantial failure rate in more unstable stage 3 and above. The aim of this investigation was to determine the biomechanical properties of different fixation techniques in a DF-3 injury model where all structures responsible for the posterior tension band mechanism are torn.

METHODS

The multidirectional three-dimensional stiffness of the subaxial cervical spine was measured in eight cadaveric specimens with a simulated DF-3 injury at C5-C6, stabilized with four different fixation techniques: anterior plate alone, anterior plate combined with posterior wire, transarticular facet screws, and a pedicle screw-rod construct, respectively.

RESULTS

The anterior plate alone did not improve stability compared to the intact spine condition, thus allowing considerable range of motion around all three cardinal axes (p > 0.05). The anterior plate combined with posterior wire technique improved flexion-extension stiffness (p = 0.023), but not in axial rotation and lateral bending. When the anterior plate was combined with transarticular facet screws or with a pedicle screws-rod instrumentation, the stability improved in flexion-extension, lateral bending, and in axial rotation (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

These findings imply that the use of anterior fixation alone is insufficient for fixation of the highly unstable DF-3 injury. In these situations, the use of anterior fixation combined with a competent posterior tension band reconstruction (e.g. transarticular screws or a posterior pedicle screws-rod device) improves segmental stability.