International Journal of Spine Surgery最新文献

{"title":"When Would Minimally Invasive Spinal Surgery Not Be Preferable for Metastatic Spine Disease?","authors":"Si Jian Hui, Jiong Hao Tan, Sahil Athia, Priyambada Kumar, Renick Lee, Shahid Ali, Seok Woo Kim, Naresh Kumar","doi":"10.14444/8658","DOIUrl":"10.14444/8658","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Metastatic spine tumor surgery (MSTS) is an important treatment modality of metastatic spinal disease (MSD). Open spine surgery (OSS) was previously the gold standard of treatment till the early 2010s. However, advancements in MSTS in recent years have led to the advent of minimally invasive spinal surgery (MISS) techniques for the treatment of MSD. The clear benefits of MISS have resulted in a current paradigm shift toward today's gold standard of MISS and early adjuvant radiotherapy in treating MSD patients. Nonetheless, despite improvements in surgical techniques and the rise of literature supporting MISS for MSD, there are still certain situations whereby MISS is not desirable or even suitable. There has also yet to be any literature describing the considerations of not using MISS in MSD in today's clinical context.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A narrative review was conducted for this manuscript. All studies related to OSS and MISS in MSTS were included.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 54 studies were included in this review. These studies discussed various advantages of MISS for MSD in today's clinical context, including the patient profile, location of vertebrae involved with metastasis requiring treatment, tumor characteristics, as well as equipment availability.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This study establishes situations in which MISS can be less applicable despite the advantages it may confer over traditional OSS. MSTS should be individualized, depending on the experience of the surgeon. OSS is a time-tested approach that still holds weight in MSTS and should be readily utilized depending on the clinical situation.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: 4: </strong></p>","PeriodicalId":38486,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Spine Surgery","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.7,"publicationDate":"2024-11-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11687041/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142640061","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Personalized Approaches to Spine Surgery.","authors":"Arati Patel, Abraham Dada, Satvir Saggi, Hunter Yamada, Vardhaan S Ambati, Elianna Goldstein, Edward C Hsiao, Praveen V Mummaneni","doi":"10.14444/8644","DOIUrl":"10.14444/8644","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Patient-centric decision-making has imbued all aspects of health care, including spine surgery. This review describes how spine surgeons can use evolving technologies and knowledge of disease and pain states to tailor their surgical approach to the individual patient. This includes preoperative screening for and optimization of low bone mineral density, intraoperative selection of implant material and customization of interbody cages and screws, and postoperative personalization of pain regimens and rehabilitation courses. By working in a multidisciplinary fashion, spine surgeons can avail themselves of these advances to provide individualized care.</p>","PeriodicalId":38486,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Spine Surgery","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.7,"publicationDate":"2024-11-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11687043/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142082093","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Clinical Outcomes Following Treatment of Cervical Spondylotic Radiculopathy With Cervical Posterior Decompression Using Unilateral Biportal Endoscopic Technique: A Single Center Retrospective Series of 20 Patients.","authors":"Keyur K Akbari, Teo Hong Lee Terry, Umesh Kanade, John Choi","doi":"10.14444/8690","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.14444/8690","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Unilateral biportal endoscopy (UBE) is a minimally invasive approach to treat cervical spondylotic radiculopathy (CSR), which is a common condition caused secondary to disc herniation, disc degeneration, uncal osteophytes, and other conditions manifesting as neuropathic radicular pain. Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion (ACDF) is the gold standard surgical technique for treating CSR. However, it has several disadvantages, including loss of mobile segment, adjacent segment degeneration (ASD), implant- and approach-related complications, and high hospitalization costs.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>The current study aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of UBE decompression for CSR.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>After obtaining IRB approval, a single-center retrospective study was undertaken. Included patients underwent UBE decompression for CSR with a minimum of 6 months of follow-up. Patient demographics, perioperative data, and length of hospital stay were reviewed. Clinical outcomes were assessed using VAS scores for neck and arm pain, and NDI scores were measure preoperatively and at 1 and 6 months after UBE decompression. A repeated analysis of variance test was performed to measure the difference between VAS and NDI scores.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Twenty patients (M: 15, F: 5) with a mean age of 56.7 ± 10.2 years were included. The mean follow-up period was 8.4 ± 1.8 months. The mean surgical time was 64.3±10.6 minutes. The average length of hospital stay was 1 day. At the final follow-up, the mean VAS for arm pain improved from 6.4 ± 0.7 to 0.6 ± 0.5 (92% improvement) and the mean VAS for neck pain improved from 3.3 ± 0.4 to 2.0 ± 0.2 (40% improvement). NDI score improved from 23.2 ± 1.95 to 5.7 ± 0.6 at the final follow-up (75% improvement). There were no complications.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>UBE is a safe and effective surgical treatment option for patients with CSR with excellent clinical outcomes.</p><p><strong>Clinical relevance: </strong>Clinical relevance of this case series study is to demonstrate the safety and efficacy of the novel unilateral biportal endoscopic decompression of cervical spondylotic radiculopathy and its short term clinical outcomes.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: 4: </strong></p>","PeriodicalId":38486,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Spine Surgery","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.7,"publicationDate":"2024-11-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142640018","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Meta-Analysis Investigating Optimal Timing of Chemoprophylaxis for Venous Thromboembolism in Operatively Managed Blunt Spinal Injuries.","authors":"Faisal A AlGhamdi, Mohammed O Alzayer, Mohammed M AlKabbani, Renad M AlJoaid, Nasser A AlJoaib, Kawther M Hadhiah, Nisreen H AlMaghraby","doi":"10.14444/8656","DOIUrl":"10.14444/8656","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Blunt spinal injuries (BSIs) are associated with substantial morbidity and mortality. Management typically involves stabilization of the spinal column and may include chemoprophylaxis for venous thromboembolism (VTE) prevention. The optimal timing of chemoprophylaxis initiation in operatively managed BSI patients remains debated.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>Analyze available literature on optimal chemoprophylaxis timing for the prevention of VTE in patients postinjury undergoing operative repair.</p><p><strong>Study design: </strong>Systematic review and meta-analysis.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. PubMed and MEDLINE were searched for studies assessing chemoprophylaxis timing in adult BSI patients. Inclusion criteria focused on operatively managed BSIs and anticoagulant usage assessment.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Three studies involving 4345 patients were included. Early chemoprophylaxis initiation was associated with significantly lower deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and overall VTE incidence compared with late initiation. No significant differences were found in pulmonary embolism (PE) incidence or mortality.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Early anticoagulant administration after spinal fixation for BSI reduces DVT and overall VTE risk without impacting PE incidence or mortality. Further research is recommended to solidify these findings and address existing gaps in the literature.</p><p><strong>Clinical relevance: </strong>Early chemoprophylaxis initiation in operatively managed BSI patients reduces DVT and overall VTE risk without affecting PE incidence or mortality LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 2.</p>","PeriodicalId":38486,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Spine Surgery","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.7,"publicationDate":"2024-11-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11687032/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142640060","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Impact of Postoperative Bracing Following Spinal Fusion for Degenerative Lumbar Conditions: An Updated Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.","authors":"An-Ping Feng, Shang-Feng Yu, Ming-Tao Zhu, Li-Ru He, Guang-Xun Lin","doi":"10.14444/8598","DOIUrl":"10.14444/8598","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>There is a lack of consensus on the use of postoperative bracing for lumbar degenerative conditions. Spine surgeons typically determine whether to apply postoperative braces based primarily on clinical experience rather than robust, evidence-based medical data. Thus, the present study sought to assess the impact of postoperative bracing on clinical outcomes, complications, and fusion rates following lumbar fusion surgery in patients with degenerative spinal conditions.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Only randomized controlled studies published between January 1990 and 20 October 2023 were included in this meta-analysis. The primary outcome measures consisted of pre- and postoperative assessments of the Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and visual analog scale (VAS) scores. Improvements in VAS and ODI scores were analyzed in the early postoperative period (1 month after operation) and at final follow-up, respectively. The analysis also encompassed fusion rates and complications.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Five studies with 362 patients were included in the present meta-analysis. In the early postoperative period, the brace group showed a relatively better improvement in ODI scores compared with the no-brace group (19.47 vs 18.18), although this difference was not statistically significant (<i>P</i> = 0.34). Similarly, during the late postoperative period, the brace group demonstrated a slightly greater improvement in VAS scores in comparison to the no-brace group (4.05 vs 3.84), but this difference did not reach statistical significance (<i>P</i> = 0.30). The complication rate was relatively lower in the brace group compared with the no-brace group (14.9% vs 17.4%), although there was no statistical difference between the 2 groups (<i>P</i> = 0.83). Importantly, there were no substantial differences in fusion rates between patients with or without braces.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The present meta-analysis revealed that the implementation of a brace following lumbar fusion surgery did not yield substantial differences in terms of postoperative pain relief, functional recovery, complication rates, or fusion rates when compared with cases where no brace was employed.</p><p><strong>Clinical relevance: </strong>This meta-analysis provides valuable insights into the clinical impact of postoperative bracing following lumbar fusion surgery for degenerative spinal conditions.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: 1: </strong></p>","PeriodicalId":38486,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Spine Surgery","volume":" ","pages":"540-550"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7,"publicationDate":"2024-11-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11616398/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"140923537","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Efficacy and Safety of Biportal Endoscopic Decompressive Laminectomy in Octogenarians With Severe Lumbar Spinal Stenosis.","authors":"Sang-Min Park, John I Shin, Jin-Ho Park, Jonghun Jung, Jiwon Park, Ho-Joong Kim, Jin S Yeom, Hyun-Jin Park","doi":"10.14444/8649","DOIUrl":"10.14444/8649","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) is prevalent among octogenarians, causing significant pain and disability. Surgical intervention is often required because of the ineffectiveness of conservative treatments. This study investigates the efficacy and safety of biportal endoscopic decompressive laminectomy (BED) in octogenarians with severe LSS, evaluating its potential as a minimally invasive surgical option.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This retrospective study included 107 patients aged 80 years or older who underwent BED for LSS between March 2017 and December 2022. Data were collected from electronic medical records, including demographic information, clinical outcomes, and surgical details. Patients with fractures, infectious spondylitis, herniated discs, and follow-up less than 12 months were excluded. Clinical outcomes were assessed using the visual analog scale, Oswestry Disability Index, European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions, and painDETECT at baseline and at 3, 6, and 12 months after surgery.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The mean age of the 107 patients was 84.1 years, with 59% being women. Significant improvements were observed in visual analog scale scores for lower back and lower extremities pain, Oswestry Disability Index, European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions, and painDETECT scores, indicating reduced pain, decreased disability, and enhanced quality of life. There were no significant differences in outcomes between patients aged 80 to 84 and those 85 or older. Surgery-related outcomes such as operation time, blood loss, and complications were similar in both age groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>BED is a safe and effective treatment for LSS in octogenarians, providing significant pain relief and functional improvement. This minimally invasive technique is also viable for patients older than 85 years, without increased risk of complications, supporting its broader indications in managing LSS in the elderly.</p><p><strong>Clinical relevance: </strong>This study highlights the efficacy and safety of BED for LSS in octogenarians, demonstrating its potential to improve quality of life and function with low risks, making it a feasible option for elderly patients.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: 4: </strong></p>","PeriodicalId":38486,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Spine Surgery","volume":" ","pages":"482-489"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7,"publicationDate":"2024-11-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11616392/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142355884","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Risk Factors for Recurrent Proximal Junctional Failure Following Adult Spinal Deformity Surgery: Analysis of 60 Patients Undergoing Fusion Extension Surgery for Proximal Junctional Failure.","authors":"Se-Jun Park, Jin-Sung Park, Dong-Ho Kang, Chong-Suh Lee, Hyun-Jun Kim","doi":"10.14444/8620","DOIUrl":"10.14444/8620","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Despite numerous studies identifying risk factors for proximal junctional failure (PJF), risk factors for recurrent PJF (R-PJF) are still not well established. Therefore, we aimed to identify the risk factors for R-PJF following adult spinal deformity (ASD) surgery.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Among 479 patients who underwent ≥5-level fusion surgery for ASD, the focus was on those who experienced R-PJF at any time or did not experience R-PJF during a follow-up duration of ≥1 year. PJF was defined as a proximal junctional angle (PJA) ≥28° plus a difference in PJA ≥22° or performance of revision surgery regardless of PJA degree. The patients were divided into 2 groups according to R-PJF development: no R-PJF and R-PJF groups. Risk factors were evaluated focusing on patient, surgical, and radiographic factors at the index surgery as well as at the revision surgery.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 60 patients in the final study cohort, 24 (40%) experienced R-PJF. Significant risk factors included greater postoperative sagittal vertical axis (OR = 1.044), overcorrection relative to age-adjusted pelvic incidence-lumbar lordosis (PI-LL; OR = 7.794) at the index surgery, a greater total sum of the proximal junctional kyphosis severity scale (OR = 1.145), and no use of the upper instrumented vertebra cement (OR = 5.494) at the revision surgery.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>We revealed that the greater postoperative sagittal vertical axis and overcorrection relative to age-adjusted pelvic incidence-lumbar lordosis at the index surgery, a greater proximal junctional kyphosis severity scale score, and no use of upper instrumented vertebra cement at the revision surgery were significant risk factors for R-PJF.</p><p><strong>Clinical relevance: </strong>To reduce the risk of R-PJF after ASD surgery, avoiding under- and overcorrection during the initial surgery is recommended. Additionally, close assessment of the severity of PJF with timely intervention is crucial, and cement augmentation should be considered during revision surgery.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: 3: </strong></p>","PeriodicalId":38486,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Spine Surgery","volume":" ","pages":"462-470"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7,"publicationDate":"2024-11-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11616410/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141898503","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Beyond the Limits to Become a Leading Force in Global Spine Surgery: Present and Future of Spine Surgery in Asia-Pacific.","authors":"Seok Woo Kim","doi":"10.14444/8669","DOIUrl":"10.14444/8669","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":38486,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Spine Surgery","volume":" ","pages":"455-456"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7,"publicationDate":"2024-11-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11616441/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142576870","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Cage Obliquity in Oblique Lumbar Interbody Fusion-How Common Is It and What Are the Effects on Fusion Rates, Subsidence, and Sagittal Alignment? A Computed Tomography-Based Analysis.","authors":"Bryan Chun Meng Foong, Joey Ying Hao Wong, Brjan Betzler, Jacob Yoong Leong Oh","doi":"10.14444/8623","DOIUrl":"10.14444/8623","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Oblique lumbar interbody fusion (OLIF) through a prepsoas approach was identified as an alternative to alleviate complications associated with direct lateral interbody fusion. Cage placement is known to influence cage subsidence and fusion rates due to suboptimal biomechanics. There are limited studies exploring cage obliquity as a potential factor influencing fusion outcomes. Hence, our objective was to assess the effects of cage obliquity and position on fusion rates, subsidence, and sagittal alignment in patients who underwent OLIF.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Patients who underwent OLIF for levels L1 to L5 in our center, performed by a single surgeon and with a minimum of 12 months of follow-up, were included in the study. Cage obliquity and sagittal placement were measured, and their correlation with fusion, subsidence, and sagittal alignment correction was assessed. Fusion and subsidence were evaluated using the Bridwell Criteria and Marchi Criteria, respectively.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among the included patients (age, 67.5 ± 7.93 years; 16 men and 37 women), 97 fusion levels were studied. The mean cage obliquity was 4.2° ± 2.8°. Ninety-six levels (99.0%) were considered to have achieved fusion with a Bridwell score of 1 or 2. Eighty-one (83.5%), 14 (14.4%), and 2 (2.06%) operated levels had a Marchi score of 0, 1, and 2, respectively. A Marchi grade of 1 or higher was considered indicative of significant subsidence. There was good improvement in both the segmental lordosis angle (4.2° ± 5.7°; <i>P</i> < 0.0001) and disc height (4.5 ± 3.8 mm; <i>P</i> < 0.0001). Cage placement did not have any statistical correlation with fusion rates, subsidence, or sagittal alignment.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Our results indicate that OLIF facilitates appropriate cage placement with only a minor degree of cage obliquity, typically less than 20°. This minor obliquity does not lead to lower fusion rates, increased subsidence, or sagittal malalignment. Despite subsidence being common, the majority of these cases resulted in complete fusion.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: 3: </strong></p>","PeriodicalId":38486,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Spine Surgery","volume":" ","pages":"595-602"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7,"publicationDate":"2024-11-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11616436/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141907909","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Rotation Preserving Fixation for the Treatment of C1 Burst Fracture Combined With Type II Odontoid Fracture: 2 Case Reports and Literature Review.","authors":"Hui Tao, Shanzhong Shao, Kun Yang, Chang Liu, Cailiang Shen, Yinshun Zhang","doi":"10.14444/8646","DOIUrl":"10.14444/8646","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aimed to evaluate the clinical feasibility and effectiveness of a monoaxial screw-rod system and anterior screw fixation for C1 and type II odontoid fractures.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a retrospective review of 2 consecutive patients with acute C1 and Anderson-D'Alonzo type II odontoid fractures. Both patients underwent treatment using a posterior monoaxial screw-rod system and anterior screw fixation. We reviewed their clinical records, including the visual analog pain scale and Neck Disability Index scores, as well as pre- and postoperative radiographs. Additionally, pre- and postoperative computed tomography images were used to classify the fracture types and assess the C1 to C2 reduction, rotation, and instability.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Both patients presented with type II C1 and type II B odontoid fractures, combined with Dickman type II transverse atlantal ligament injuries. All surgical procedures were successfully performed without complications such as vertebral artery injury, neurological deficit, esophageal injury, or wound infection. Both patients achieved almost complete bone healing of the fractures, and C1 to C2 rotation was well preserved (32° and 49°) without atlantoaxial instability after follow-ups of 21 and 25 months, respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>A monoaxial screw-rod system and anterior screw fixation could be promising surgical strategies for C1 fractures combined with type II odontoid fractures, even in cases involving transverse atlantal ligament injuries. The preservation of C1 to C2 rotation without atlantoaxial instability was observed after fixation. However, extensive case-finding and long-term follow-up are needed to understand the effectiveness of this treatment.</p><p><strong>Clinical relevance: </strong>In order to preserve the C1-C2 rotation, a monoaxial screw-rod system and anterior screw fixation may be more suitable for patients with C1 fractures combined with type II odontoid fractures.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: 5: </strong></p>","PeriodicalId":38486,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Spine Surgery","volume":" ","pages":"617-625"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7,"publicationDate":"2024-11-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11616375/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142509858","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}