| Literature DB >> 33218335 |
Xiaobao Zou1,2, Binbin Wang2, Haozhi Yang2, Su Ge2, Bieping Ouyang1,2, Yuyue Chen2, Ling Ni2, Shuang Zhang2, Hong Xia2, Xiangyang Ma3,4.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The revision surgery of basilar invagination (BI) with irreducible atlantoaxial dislocation (IAAD) after a previous occipitocervical fusion (OCF) is challenging. Transoral revision surgery has more advantages than a combined anterior and posterior approach in addressing this pathology. The C-JAWS is a cervical compressive staple that has been used in the lower cervical spine with many advantages. Up to now, there is no report on the application of C-JAWS in the atlantoaxial joint. We therefore present this report to investigate the clinical outcomes of transoral intraarticular cage distraction and C-JAWS fixation for revision of BI with IAAD.Entities:
Keywords: Basilar invagination; Irreducible atlantoaxial dislocation; Revision surgery; Transoral approach
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 33218335 PMCID: PMC7679985 DOI: 10.1186/s12891-020-03792-3
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Musculoskelet Disord ISSN: 1471-2474 Impact factor: 2.362
Demographic and clinical data of the 9 patients
| Case | Age (year)/Sex | Anomalies in radiology | Previous surgery | Duration between the previous urgery and the revision (month) | Revision cause | Revision surgery |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 59/F | BI, IAAD, AA | OCF (C0–1) | 120 | IAAD with VSCC | PRI and TARF |
| 2 | 41/M | BI, IAAD, AA, KFS, Chiari | OCF (C0–2) | 36 | IAAD with VSCC | PRI, PFD and TARF |
| 3 | 57/M | BI, IAAD, AA | OCF (C0–3) | 180 | IAAD with VSCC | PRI and TARF |
| 4 | 35/F | BI,IAAD, AA, KFS | OCF (C0–2) | 65 | IAAD with VSCC | PRI and TARF |
| 5 | 67/F | BI, IAAD, AA, Chiari | OCF (C0–4) | 47 | IAAD with VSCC | PRI, PFD and TARF |
| 6 | 27/M | BI, IAAD, AA, KFS, Chiari | OCF (C0–2) | 132 | IAAD with VSCC | PRI, PFD and TARF |
| 7 | 36/F | BI, IAAD, AA | OCF (C0–2) | 18 | IAAD with VSCC | PRI and TARF |
| 8 | 45/F | BI, IAAD | OCF (C0–3) | 144 | IAAD with VSCC | PRI and TARF |
| 9 | 18/M | BI, IAAD, AA, KFS, Chiari | OCF (C0–1) | 20 | IAAD with VSCC | PRI and TARF |
BI basilar invagination; IAAD irreducible atlantoaxial dislocation; AA atlas assimilation; KFS Klippel-Feil syndrome; Chiari Chiari malformation; OCF occipitocervical fusion; PRI posterior removal of instrument; PFD posterior fossa decompression; VSCC ventral spinal cord compression; TARF transoral atlantoaxial reduction and fixation
Clinical symptoms
| Symptoms | Preoperative no. (%) | Postoperative improvement no. (%) |
|---|---|---|
| Occipital or neck pain | 7 (77.8%) | 6 (85.7%) |
| Extremity numbness | 8 (88.9%) | 6 (75.0%) |
| Extremity weakness | 7 (77.8%) | 7 (100%) |
| Unsteady gait | 3 (33.3%) | 3 (100%) |
| Hemiparalysis | 2 (22.2%) | 2 (100%) |
Each patient may have one or more symptoms
Fig. 1Intraoperative procedures. a Photograph after the placement of bilateral intraarticular cages. b Intraoperative X-ray after the implantation of bilateral intraarticular cages showed satisfactory atlantoaxial reduction. C. Intraoperative X-ray after the implantation of C-JAWS showed well position of devices
Fig. 2Operating mode of the C-JAWS. a On the frontal views, the bilateral arms of holder were distracted to shorten the distance between the top and bottom rivets to control compression. b The corresponding change of holder on lateral views
Fig. 3A 41-year-old man was diagnosed with BI with IAAD after a failed posterior OCF, and revised by transoral intraarticular cage distraction and C-JAWS fixation. a-c Images of cervical X-rays and CT scan before revision surgery showed evidence of BI with IAAD. d Preoperative Sagittal MRI showed compression of the cervicomedullary junction. e-g Postoperative cervical X-rays and CT scan performed at 1 week after revision surgery showed satisfactory reduction and fixation. h Postoperative sagittal MRI showed a desirable decompression of the cervicomedullary junction. i Postoperative three-dimensional reconstruction showed location of C-JAWS. j-l Cervical X-rays and CT scan at 6-month follow-up showed a solid bone fusion without loss of reduction
Pre- and Postoperative data of the 9 patients
| Case | JOA (preop) | JOA (postop) | ADI (preop) | ADI (postop) | CMA (preop) | CMA (postop) | CL (preop) | CL (postop) | Bone fusion confirmed (month) | Follow-up (month) | Complication |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 12 | 16 | 9.6 | 1.3 | 136.5 | 160.4 | 8.5 | 5.1 | 6 | 24 | No |
| 2 | 10 | 15 | 8.3 | 1.8 | 143.5 | 162.6 | – | – | 3 | 12 | No |
| 3 | 6 | 11 | 10.3 | 3.0 | 98.5 | 153.2 | 14.5 | 3.8 | 3 | 20 | No |
| 4 | 8 | 13 | 9.8 | 0 | 112.7 | 148.1 | 10.7 | 2.9 | 9 | 30 | No |
| 5 | 11 | 16 | 6.9 | 0 | 125.2 | 165.0 | – | – | 6 | 27 | No |
| 6 | 8 | 12 | 8.5 | 1.5 | 105.1 | 158.4 | – | – | 6 | 9 | No |
| 7 | 10 | 15 | 8.3 | 0 | 120.8 | 140.8 | 7.5 | −0.5 | 3 | 12 | No |
| 8 | 13 | 17 | 7.1 | 0.6 | 133.8 | 170.1 | 15.6 | 3.0 | 9 | 21 | No |
| 9 | 9 | 13 | 8.7 | 1.0 | 110.3 | 139.2 | 12.7 | 0 | 3 | 15 | No |
| M ± SD | 9.7 ± 2.2 | 14.2 ± 2.0 | 8.6 ± 1.2 | 1.0 ± 1.0 | 120.7 ± 15.3 | 155.3 ± 10.8 | 11.6 ± 3.3 | 2.4 ± 2.2 | |||
| t | −25.931 | 21.243 | −7.890 | 6.334 | |||||||
| p | 0.000a | 0.000a | 0.000a | 0.001a | |||||||
aPaired-sample t-test
JOA Japanese Orthopedic Association score; ADI atlas-dens interval; CMA cervicomedullary angle; CL distance between the top of the odontoid process and the Chamberlain line