Literature DB >> 35543854

Traumatic spondylolisthesis of axis: clinical and imaging experience at a level one trauma center.

Yu Cai1, Shekhar Khanpara1, David Timaran1, Susanna Spence1, Jennifer McCarty1, Azin Aein1, Luis Nunez1, Octavio Arevalo1,2, Roy Riascos3.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Traumatic spondylolisthesis of the axis (TSA) with bilateral pars interarticularis fracture (a pattern also known as Hangman's fractures) accounts for 4-5% of all cervical fractures. Various classification systems have been described to assist therapeutic decision-making. The goal is to reassess the utility of these classifications for treatment strategy and evaluate additional imaging associations.
METHODS: This is an IRB approved, retrospective analysis of patients with imaging diagnosis of TSA from 2016 to 2019. Consensus reads were performed classifying TSA into various Levine and Edwards subtypes and typical vs. atypical fractures. Other imaging findings such as additional cervical fractures, traumatic brain injury, spinal cord injury, and vertebral artery injury were recorded. Treatment strategy and outcome were reviewed from clinical charts. Fisher exact test was used for statistical analysis.
RESULTS: A total of 58 patients were included, with a mean age of 62.7 ± 25 years, and male to female ratio of 1:1.2. Motor vehicle collision was the most common cause of TSA. Type I and III injuries were the most and the least common injuries, respectively. Patients with type I injuries were found to have good healing rates with conservative management (p < 0.001) while type IIa and III injuries were managed with surgical stabilization (p = 0.04 and p = 0.01, respectively). No statistical difference was observed in the treatment strategy for type II fractures (p = 0.12) and its prediction of the associated injuries. Atypical fractures were not found to have a higher incidence of SCI (p = 0.31). A further analysis revealed significantly higher-grade vertebral artery injuries (grades III and IV according to Biffl grading) in patients with type IIa and III injuries (p = 0.001) and an 11-fold increased risk of TBI compared to type I and type II fractures (p = 0.013).
CONCLUSION: TSA fracture types were not associated with any clinical outcome. Levine and Edwards type II classification itself is not enough to guide the treatment plan and does not account for associated injuries. Additional imaging markers may be needed.
© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to American Society of Emergency Radiology (ASER).

Entities:  

Keywords:  Blunt cerebrovascular injury; Brain/neck imaging; Hangman’s fracture; Traumatic spondylolisthesis of the axis; Typical/atypical fractures

Mesh:

Year:  2022        PMID: 35543854     DOI: 10.1007/s10140-022-02041-5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Emerg Radiol        ISSN: 1070-3004


  14 in total

1.  Hangman's fracture: a historical and biomechanical perspective.

Authors:  Mahmoud Rayes; Monika Mittal; Setti S Rengachary; Sandeep Mittal
Journal:  J Neurosurg Spine       Date:  2010-12-24

2.  Cervical spine trauma: the common combined conditions.

Authors:  J A Gehweiler; W M Clark; R E Schaaf; B Powers; M D Miller
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1979-01       Impact factor: 11.105

3.  Halo vest versus spinal fusion for cervical injury: evidence from an outcome study.

Authors:  R D Bucholz; K C Cheung
Journal:  J Neurosurg       Date:  1989-06       Impact factor: 5.115

4.  Hangman's fracture.

Authors:  N B Termansen
Journal:  Acta Orthop Scand       Date:  1974

Review 5.  Management of Hangman's Fractures: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Hamadi Murphy; Gregory D Schroeder; Weilong J Shi; Christopher K Kepler; Mark F Kurd; Andrew N Fleischman; Frank Kandziora; Jens R Chapman; Lorin M Benneker; Alexander R Vaccaro
Journal:  J Orthop Trauma       Date:  2017-09       Impact factor: 2.512

6.  Atypical hangman's fractures.

Authors:  J K Starr; F J Eismont
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1993-10-15       Impact factor: 3.468

7.  Blunt carotid arterial injuries: implications of a new grading scale.

Authors:  W L Biffl; E E Moore; P J Offner; K E Brega; R J Franciose; J M Burch
Journal:  J Trauma       Date:  1999-11

8.  Hangman's fracture: Management strategy and healing rate in a prospective multi-centre observational study of 34 patients.

Authors:  Solène Prost; Cédric Barrey; Benjamin Blondel; Stéphane Fuentes; Laurent Barresi; Benjamin Nicot; Vincent Challier; Maxime Lleu; Joël Godard; Pascal Kouyoumdjian; Nicolas Lonjon; Paulo Marinho; Eurico Freitas; Sébastien Schuller; Jérémy Allia; Julien Berthiller; Yann Philippe Charles
Journal:  Orthop Traumatol Surg Res       Date:  2019-04-17       Impact factor: 2.256

Review 9.  A systematic review of the management of hangman's fractures.

Authors:  Xin-Feng Li; Li-Yang Dai; Hua Lu; Xiao-Dong Chen
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2005-10-19       Impact factor: 3.134

10.  Management of Typical and Atypical Hangman's Fractures.

Authors:  Rafid Al-Mahfoudh; Christopher Beagrie; Ele Woolley; Rasheed Zakaria; Mark Radon; Simon Clark; Robin Pillay; Martin Wilby
Journal:  Global Spine J       Date:  2015-09-09
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.