Literature DB >> 30009085

Use of intraoperative X-ray to differentiate between reducible versus irreducible atlantoaxial dislocation.

Nupur Pruthi1, Lokesh S Nehete2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The treatment and classification of atlantoaxial dislocations (AADs) remain controversial. Here, we utilized intraoperative X-ray to differentiate between reducible and irreducible AADs.
METHODS: Five patients were diagnosed as having irreducible AAD on dynamic and post-traction X-rays. Under general anesthesia, they were placed prone in a neutral position utilizing skeletal traction. The X-rays and motor evoked potential (MEP), were then monitored before, during, and after placing a thumb on the C2 spinous process and pushing it anteriorly to attain reduction.
RESULTS: The intraoperative X-ray confirmed reducibility of AAD in four patients; they subsequently underwent a C1-C2 posterior fusion, which maintained that reduction. For the one patient with an irreducible AAD (despite thumb maneuver), an anterior release was required first to attain reduction, followed by posterior C1-C2 fusion.
CONCLUSION: Here, we divided irreducible AAD into two categories: a) reducible-utilizing a thumb maneuver to compress/push the C2 spinous process forward with the patient positioned prone and b) irreducible-those who cannot be reduced with this technique. A posterior only approach was sufficient for those with "reducible" AAD, whereas those who could not be reduced required an anterior release followed by posterior fusion.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Anterior release; dynamic X-ray; irreducible atlantoaxial dislocation (AAD); posterior cervical surgery; push-prone maneuver; thumb maneuver; traction

Year:  2018        PMID: 30009085      PMCID: PMC6024504          DOI: 10.4103/sni.sni_110_18

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Surg Neurol Int        ISSN: 2152-7806


INTRODUCTION

The treatment and classification of atlantoaxial dislocations (AADs) remain controversial. It is generally accepted that the treatment of symptomatic AAD should include surgical reduction and fusion/fixation.[12] Reducibility is traditionally attained using dynamic X-ray imaging with skeletal traction. For patients with reducible AAD utilizing the thumb pressure technique posteriorly compressing the C2 spinous process anteriorly (e.g., under X-ray control, with traction and motor evoked potential [MEP] monitoring), a posterior fixation alone maintained reduction. Those with irreducible AAD, where the dislocation could not reduced by traction or in this study by such compression of the C2 spinous process anteriorly, first require trans-oral release followed by posterior fusion/fixation.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Five patients were diagnosed as having irreducible AAD based on preoperative dynamic and post-traction X-rays [Table 1]. There were three males and two females averaging 14 years of age (range ages 4–32).
Table 1

Summary of clinical data for all five patients

Summary of clinical data for all five patients After general anesthesia, patients were placed in a prone neutral position utilizing with skeletal traction, X-ray, and MEP monitoring. They then underwent a reduction by applying posterior thumb pressure, compressing the C2 spinous process anteriorly [Figure 1].
Figure 1

(a) AAD with canal narrowing at C1. (b) Intraoperative thumb maneuver (pushing of C2 spinous process anteriorly) after positioning under general anesthesia showing reduction of AAD

(a) AAD with canal narrowing at C1. (b) Intraoperative thumb maneuver (pushing of C2 spinous process anteriorly) after positioning under general anesthesia showing reduction of AAD

RESULTS

Full reduction of AAD with or without associated odontoid fractures, was successfully achieved and maintained in four patients; all four successfully underwent posterior C1–C2 fusions [Figures 2 and 3]. The one patient who failed to achieve reduction required an initial trans-oral release followed by posterior C1–C2 fusions.
Figure 2

Case 1 atlantoaxial dislocation (AAD) without fracture: (a) preoperative X-ray showing irreducible ADD in flexion, (b) preoperative X-ray showing irreducible ADD in extension, (c) post-traction X-ray showing irreducible AAD, (d) midsagittal computed tomography spine showing AAD with canal narrowing, (e) Magnetic Resonance Imaging cervical spine showing canal narrowing at C1 with obliteration of anterior CSF spaces, (f) intraoperative X-ray after position under general anesthesia before thumb maneuver showing AAD, (g) intraoperative X-ray after position under general anesthesia after thumb maneuver showing reduction of AAD, (h) postoperative implant in situ with reduction of AAD

Figure 3

Case 2 AAD with odontoid fracture: (a) preoperative X-ray showing odontoid fracture with AAD, (b) intraoperative X-ray after positioning under general anesthesia before thumb maneuver showing AAD, (c) intraoperative X-ray after positioning under general anesthesia after thumb maneuver showing reduction of AAD, (d) postoperative X-ray showing implant in situ with reduction of AAD

Case 1 atlantoaxial dislocation (AAD) without fracture: (a) preoperative X-ray showing irreducible ADD in flexion, (b) preoperative X-ray showing irreducible ADD in extension, (c) post-traction X-ray showing irreducible AAD, (d) midsagittal computed tomography spine showing AAD with canal narrowing, (e) Magnetic Resonance Imaging cervical spine showing canal narrowing at C1 with obliteration of anterior CSF spaces, (f) intraoperative X-ray after position under general anesthesia before thumb maneuver showing AAD, (g) intraoperative X-ray after position under general anesthesia after thumb maneuver showing reduction of AAD, (h) postoperative implant in situ with reduction of AAD Case 2 AAD with odontoid fracture: (a) preoperative X-ray showing odontoid fracture with AAD, (b) intraoperative X-ray after positioning under general anesthesia before thumb maneuver showing AAD, (c) intraoperative X-ray after positioning under general anesthesia after thumb maneuver showing reduction of AAD, (d) postoperative X-ray showing implant in situ with reduction of AAD All patients achieved/maintained correction in spine alignment and bony fusion over a mean follow-up period of 14.4 months (4–23 months).

DISCUSSION

Differentiating between “reducible” and “irreducible” AADs is complicated. It is typically defined utilizing radiological investigations: dynamic and post-traction X-rays. Utilizing X-ray, traction, and MEP monitoring, we proposed utilizing a novel posterior C2 thumb compressive maneuver to differentiate between “reducible” and “irreducible” AADs [Figure 1]. Sharp and Purser described a procedure of manual reduction of atlantoaxial subluxation in patients with atlanto-axial instability in patients with ankylosing spondylitis and/or rheumatoid arthritis. The anterior subluxation in the flexed position was reduced by extension and, consequently, increased the space available for the cord.[4] “Reducible” AAD requires posterior fusion alone whereas an “irreducible” AAD requires an anterior transoral decompression/release followed by a posterior fusion.[35] In 2006, Wang et al.[5] described that most “irreducible” AADs could be reduced following anterior release of contracted soft tissues. Srivastava et al.[3] similarly showed that anterior release followed by an instrumented posterior fusion was safe and effective for “irreducible” AAD associated with basilar invagination.

CONCLUSION

Here, we defined irreducible AAD into two categories: a) reducible—those for whom posterior-anterior C2 thumb maneuvers resulted in adequate reduction requiring posterior fusion alone and b) irreducible despite the thumb maneuver, warranting initial anterior release followed by posterior fusion.

Financial support and sponsorship

Nil.

Conflicts of interest

There are no conflicts of interest.
  5 in total

1.  Reduction of fixed atlantoaxial dislocation in 24 cases: technical note.

Authors:  Atul Goel; Arvind G Kulkarni; Praveen Sharma
Journal:  J Neurosurg Spine       Date:  2005-04

2.  Open reduction of irreducible atlantoaxial dislocation by transoral anterior atlantoaxial release and posterior internal fixation.

Authors:  Chao Wang; Ming Yan; Hai Tao Zhou; Sheng Lin Wang; Geng Ting Dang
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2006-05-15       Impact factor: 3.468

3.  Clinical assessment of atlantoaxial instability using the Sharp-Purser test.

Authors:  G Uitvlugt; S Indenbaum
Journal:  Arthritis Rheum       Date:  1988-07

4.  Single-stage anterior release and posterior instrumented fusion for irreducible atlantoaxial dislocation with basilar invagination.

Authors:  Sudhir Kumar Srivastava; Rishi Anil Aggarwal; Pradip Sharad Nemade; Sunil Krishna Bhosale
Journal:  Spine J       Date:  2015-09-26       Impact factor: 4.166

Review 5.  Decision making.

Authors:  Arnold H Menezes
Journal:  Childs Nerv Syst       Date:  2008-03-26       Impact factor: 1.475

  5 in total
  2 in total

1.  Kinematic MRI Analysis of Reducible Atlantoaxial Dislocation for Decompression.

Authors:  Liang Dong; Chaoyuan Ge; Zhengwei Xu; Dongqi Wang; Honghui Sun; Dingjun Hao
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2020-12-15       Impact factor: 3.411

2.  Retropharyngeal Reduction Plate for Atlantoaxial Dislocation: A Cadaveric Test and Morphometric Trajectory Analysis.

Authors:  Jian-Yi Li; Yu-Kun Du; Zhao Meng; Zheng Zhao; Hui-Qiang Hu; Jia-le Shao; Xiao-Jie Tang; Wei-Qing Kong; Tong-Shuai Xu; Cheng Shao; Yi-Xin Zhang; Yong-Ming Xi
Journal:  Orthop Surg       Date:  2022-01-30       Impact factor: 2.071

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.