Hangman’s Fracture of the Cervical Spine: A Prospective Study

Introduction: Hangman’s fracture is the second most common fracture of all the C2 vertebral fractures. It has been observed,which accounts for 55% of cervical fractures. They form 23–25% of (C2) axis fractures.Materials and Methods: All Type II and IIa hangman’s fractures operated were included in this study. Twelve patients (eightmen and four women) between 20 and 60 years of age diagnosed with unstable hangman’s fracture, treated, and followed upin our department were included in the study. Ten patients were injured in road traffic accidents, and two were injured due tofalls from height.Results: The total number of patients included in the study was 12, the age range from 20 to 60 years; male-to-female ratiois 8:4. All patients presented with neck pain. In Type II and IIa cases, the anterior approach was made in ten cases, where thereduction was achieved with traction. In anterior cases, the reduction was maintained after fixation.Conclusion: The anterior approach with primary internal stabilization is the appropriate option for unstable Type II, Type IIahangman’s fracture in cases was preoperative reduction that could be achieved. Using the anterior approach with the primaryinternal fixation of these fractures, solid fusion was achieved in all cases.

Functional Outcome of Unstable Distal Radius Fracture with Dorsally Displaced Radial rim Treated with Volar Variable Angle Locking Compression Plate

Introduction: Distal radius is one of the common fracture sites of the human skeleton. Dorsally displaced distal radius fractures(DRFs) are the most common type of DRF.Materials and Methods: Two matched cohorts of 20 matched patients, one with a displaced dorsal rim fracture >2 mm (Group1), and the other without a dorsal rim fracture (Group 2) were analyzed in this study with volar variable angle locking compressionplate fixation for dorsally unstable DRFs.Results: No significant difference was found between the two groups in overall wrist function or wrist pain. The mean displacementof dorsal rims in Group 1 was 3.0 mm and the mean diameter of the retained articular portion of the dorsal articular wall was2.0 mm. No significant difference was found between the two groups in terms of any radiographic parameters or the arthriticgrading of radiocarpal joints.Conclusion: These results suggest that a displaced dorsal rim fracture does not adversely affect the outcomes after the volarvariable angle locking compression plate fixation of a dorsally displaced DRF, indicating that an additional dorsal approach isunnecessary for reducing a displaced dorsal rim fracture