Combined Anterior Odontoid Screw Fixation and C1-C2 Jefferson Fracture Anterior Fixation: A Step-by-Step Technical Note.

BACKGROUND: Combined triple atlas (C1)-axis (C2) fixation has been described in previous literature as a safe, effective, and minimally invasive procedure for complex atlas and odontoid fractures that allows for a greater range of motion compared with posterior approaches and atlanto-occipital fusion. However, it is rarely performed due to the occipital-cervical diastasis resulting from often-fractured C1 joint masses. No evidence-based consensus has been reached regarding the treatment of complex atlantoaxial fractures, and the choice of surgical strategy is based only on clinical experience. METHODS: We report the combined triple C1-C2 fixation technique with manual reduction of the joint masses during patient positioning on the operating table, which allowed for effective stabilization during a single surgical session. We describe our experience in the management of a 75-year-old patient presenting with an acute complex type II fracture of C1, which also involved 1 lateral mass, combined with a type II odontoid fracture and occipital-cervical diastasis. RESULTS: We provide a step-by-step guide for combined triple C1-C2 anterior fixation with manual fracture reduction and describe the clinical case of an acute complex type II fracture of C1, which also involved 1 lateral mass, combined with a type II odontoid fracture and occipital-cervical diastasis. CONCLUSIONS: Combined triple C1-C2 fixation represents a safe and efficient minimally invasive anterior approach for complex type II fractures of C1 with type II odontoid fractures. Manual reduction of the joint masses during patient positioning allows for effective stabilization in a single surgical session.

Operative Management Improves Near-term Survival of Patients With Odontoid Type II Fractures: A Propensity-matched National Registry Analysis.

STUDY DESIGN: National Trauma Data Bank (NTDB) review and propensity-matched analysis. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate differences in clinical outcomes by operative management. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Odontoid type II fractures are the most prevalent cervical fracture. Operative intervention on these fractures is frequently debated; surgical risks are compounded by clinical severity, patient age, and comorbidities. METHODS: This registry review included index admissions for odontoid type II fractures [International Classification of Diseases (ICD)-10 codes beginning with S12.11] from 1/1/2017 to 1/1/2020; patients who died in the emergency department (ED) were excluded. Propensity score techniques were used to match patients 1:1 by surgical management, using a caliper distance of 0.05, after matching on the following covariates that differed significantly between surgical and nonsurgical patients: age, sex, race, cause of injury, transfer status, injury severity score, ED Glasgow coma score, ED systolic blood pressure, presence of transverse ligamentous injury, cervical dislocation, and 8 comorbidities. The following outcomes were analyzed with McNemar tests and Wilcoxon signed-rank tests: near-term survival (discharged from the hospital to locations other than morgue or hospice), intensive care unit (ICU) admission, hospital complications, median hospital length of stay (LOS), and median ICU LOS. RESULTS: There were 16,607 patients, 2916 (17.6%) were operatively managed and 13,691 were nonoperatively managed. Before matching, survival was greater for patients managed operatively compared with nonoperatively (95.0% vs. 88.2%). The matched population consisted of 5334 patients: 2667 patients in the operative group (91.5% of this population) and 2667 well-matched patients in the nonoperative group. After matching, there was a survival benefit for patients who were operatively managed compared with nonoperative management (94.8% vs. 91.4% P <0.001). However, operative management was associated with greater development of complications, ICU admission, and longer hospital and ICU LOS. CONCLUSION: Compared with nonoperative management, operative management demonstrated a significant near-term survival benefit for patients with odontoid type II fractures in select patients. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.

Development of a Predictive Model for Persistent Instability Following Conservative Management of Type II Odontoid Fractures.

BACKGROUND: Odontoid fractures are common cervical spine fractures; however, significant controversy exists regarding their treatment. Risk factors for failure of conservative therapy have been identified, although no predictive risk score has been developed to aid in decision-making. METHODS: A retrospective review was conducted of all patients evaluated at a level 1 trauma center. Patients identified with type II odontoid fractures as classified by the D'Alonzo Classification system who were treated with external orthosis were included in analysis. Patients were considered to have failed conservative therapy if they were offered surgical intervention. A machine learning method (Risk-SLIM) was then utilized to create a risk stratification score based on risk factors to identify patients at high risk for requiring surgical intervention due to persistent instability. RESULTS: A total of 138 patients were identified as presenting with type II odontoid fractures that were treated conservatively; 38 patients were offered surgery for persistent instability. The Odontoid Fracture Predictive Model (OFPM) was created using a machine learning algorithm with a 5-fold cross validation area under the curve of 0.7389 (95% CI: 0.671 to 0.808). Predictive factors were found to include fracture displacement, displacement greater than 5 mm, comminution at the fracture base, and history of smoking. The probability of persistent instability was <5% with a score of 0 and 88% with a score of 5. CONCLUSIONS: The OFPM model is a unique, quick, and accurate tool to assist in clinical decision-making in patients with type II odontoid fractures. External validation is necessary to evaluate the validity of these findings.

Evidence and Controversies in Geriatric Odontoid Fracture Management.

Geriatric odontoid fractures are some of the most common spine injuries in our aging population, and their prevalence is only continuing to increase. Despite several investigational studies, treatment remains controversial and there is limited conclusive evidence regarding the management of odontoid fractures. These injuries typically occur in medically complex and frail geriatric patients with poor bone quality, making their treatment particularly challenging. In this article, we review the evidence for conservative management as well as surgical intervention and discuss various treatment strategies. Given the high morbidity and mortality associated with odontoid fractures in the elderly, thoughtful consideration and an emphasis on patient-centered goals of treatment are critical to maximize function in this vulnerable population.

Type II odontoid fractures in the elderly presenting to the emergency department: an assessment of factors affecting in-hospital mortality and discharge to skilled nursing facilities.

BACKGROUND CONTEXT: Type II odontoid fractures (OF) are among the most common cervical spine injuries in the geriatric population. However, there is a paucity of literature regarding their epidemiology. Additionally, the optimal management of these injuries remains controversial, and no study has evaluated the short-term outcomes of geriatric patients presenting to emergency departments (ED). PURPOSE: This study aims to document the epidemiology of geriatric patients presenting to EDs with type II OFs and determine whether surgical management was associated with early adverse outcomes such as in-hospital mortality and discharge to skilled nursing facilities (SNF). STUDY DESIGN: This is a retrospective cohort study. PATIENT SAMPLE: Data was used from the 2016-2020 Nationwide Emergency Department Sample. Patient encounters corresponding to type II OFs were identified. Patients younger than 65 at the time of presentation to the ED and those with concomitant spinal pathology were excluded. OUTCOME MEASURES: The association between the surgical management of geriatric type II OFs and outcomes such as in-hospital mortality and discharge to SNFs. METHODS: Patient, fracture, and surgical management characteristics were recorded. A propensity score matched cohort was constructed to reduce differences in age, comorbidities, and injury severity between patients undergoing operative and nonoperative management. Additionally, to develop a positive control for the analysis of geriatric patients with type II OFs and no other concomitant spinal pathology, a cohort of patients that had been excluded due to the presence of a concomitant spinal cord injury (SCI) was also constructed. Multivariate regressions were then performed on both the matched and unmatched cohorts to ascertain the associations between surgical treatment and in-hospital mortality, inpatient length of stay, encounter charges, and discharge to SNFs. RESULTS: A total of 11,325 encounters were included. The mean total charge per encounter was $60,221. 634 (5.6%) patients passed away during their encounters. In total, 1,005 (8.9%) patients were managed surgically. Surgical management of type II OFs was associated with a 316% increase in visit charge (95% CI: 291%-341%, p<.001), increased inpatient length of stay (IRR: 2.87, 95% CI: 2.62-3.12, p<.001), and increased likelihood of discharge to SNFs (OR=2.62, 95% CI: 2.26-3.05, p<.001), but decreased in-hospital mortality (OR=0.32, CI: 0.21-0.45, p<.001). The propensity score matched cohort consisted of 2,010 patients, matching each of the 1,005 that underwent surgery to 1,005 that did not. These cohorts were well balanced across age (78.24 vs 77.91 years), Elixhauser Comorbidity Index (3.68 vs 3.71), and Injury Severity Score (30.15 vs 28.93). This matching did not meaningfully alter the associations determined between surgical management and in-hospital mortality (OR=0.34, CI=0.21-0.55, p<.001) or SNF discharge (OR=2.59, CI=2.13-3.16, p<.001). Lastly, the positive control cohort of patients with concurrent SCI had higher rates of SNF discharge (50.0% vs 42.6%, p<.001), surgical management (32.3% vs 9.7%, p<.001), and in-hospital mortality (28.9% vs 5.6%, p<.001). CONCLUSIONS: This study lends insight into the epidemiology of geriatric type II OFs and quantifies risk factors influencing adverse outcomes. Patient informed consent should include a discussion of the protective association between definitive surgical management and in-hospital mortality against potential operative morbidity, increased lengths of hospital stay, and increased likelihood of discharge to SNFs. This information may impact patient treatment selection and decision making.

Odontoid fractures above C2 to pelvis posterior instrumented fusions: a single center's 11-year experience.

PURPOSE: To define the prevalence, characteristics, and treatment approach for proximal junction failure secondary to odontoid fractures in patients with prior C2-pelvis posterior instrumented fusions (PSF). METHODS: A single institution's database was queried for multi-level fusions (6+ levels), including a cervical component. Posterior instrumentation from C2-pelvis and minimum 6-month follow-up was inclusion criteria. Patients who sustained dens fractures were identified; each fracture was subdivided based on Anderson & D'Alonzo and Grauer's classifications. Comparisons between the groups were performed using Chi-square and T tests. RESULTS: 80 patients (71.3% female; average age 68.1 ± 8.1 years; 45.0% osteoporosis) were included. Average follow-up was 59.8 ± 42.7 months. Six patients (7.5%) suffered an odontoid fracture post-operatively. Cause of fracture in all patients was a mechanical fall. Average time to fracture was 23 ± 23.1 months. Average follow-up after initiation of fracture management was 5.84 ± 4 years (minimum 1 year). Three patients sustained type IIA fractures one of which had a concomitant unilateral C2 pars fracture. Three patients sustained comminuted type III fractures with concomitant unilateral C2 pars fractures. Initial treatment included operative care in 2 patients, and an attempt at non-operative care in 4. Non-operative care failed in 75% of patients who ultimately required revision with proximal extension. All patients with a concomitant pars fracture had failure of non-operative care. Patients with an intact pars were more stable, but 50% required revision for pain. CONCLUSIONS: In this 11-year experience at a single institution, the prevalence of odontoid fractures above a C2-pelvis PSF was 7.5%. Fracture morphology varied, but 50% were complex, comminuted C2 body fractures with concomitant pars fractures. While nonoperative management may be suitable for type II fractures with simple patterns, more complex and unstable fractures likely benefit from upfront surgical intervention to prevent fracture displacement and neural compression. As all fractures occurred secondary to a mechanical fall, inpatient and community measures aimed to minimize risk and prevent mechanical falls would be beneficial in this high-risk group.

Biomechanical comparison of two different compression screws for the treatment of odontoid fractures in human dens axis specimen.

BACKGROUND: Lag screw osteosynthesis for odontoid fractures has a high rate of pseudoarthrosis, especially in elderly patients. Besides biomechanical properties of the different screw types, insufficient fragment compression or unnoticed screw stripping may be the main causing factors for this adverse event. The aim of the study was to compare two screws in clinical use with different design principles in terms of compression force and stability against screw stripping. METHODS: Twelve human cadaveric C2 vertebral bodies were considered. Bone density was determined. The specimens were matched according to bone density and randomly assigned to two experimental groups. An odontoid fracture was induced, which were fixed either with a 3.5 mm standard compression screw or with a 5 mm sleeve nut screw. Both screws are certified for the treatment of odontoid fractures. The bone samples were fixed in a measuring device. The screwdriver was driven mechanically. The tests were analyzed for peak interfragmentary compression and screw-in torque with a frequency of 20 Hz. FINDINGS: The maximum fragment compression was significantly higher with screw with sleeve nut at 346.13(SD ±72.35) N compared with classic compression screw at 162.68(SD ±114.13) N (p = 0.025). Screw stripping occurred significantly earlier in classic compression screw at 255.5(SD ±192.0)° rotation after reaching maximum compression than in screw with sleeve nut at 1005.2(SD ±341.1)° (p = 0.0039). INTERPRETATION: Screw with sleeve nut achieves greater fragment compression and is more robust to screw stripping compared to classic compression screw. Whether the better biomechanical properties lead to a reduction of pseudoarthrosis has to be proven in clinical studies.

Feasibility of Two-Screw Anterior Fixation for Odontoid Fractures in a Chinese Population: A Morphometric Study Based on Computed Tomography.

Background: To evaluate the feasibility of treating odontoid fractures in the Chinese population with two cortical screws based on computed tomography (CT) scans and describe a new measurement strategy to guide screw insertion in treating these fractures. Methods: A retrospective review of cervical computed tomographic scans of 128 patients (aged 18-76 years; men, 55 [43.0%]) was performed. The minimum external transverse diameter (METD), minimum external anteroposterior diameter (MEAD), maximum screw length (MSL), and screw projection back angle (SPBA) of the odontoid process were measured on coronal and sagittal CT images. Results: The mean values of METD and MEAD were 10.0 ± 1.1 mm and 12.0 ± 1.0 mm, respectively, in men and 9.2 ± 1.0 mm and 11.0 ± 1.0 mm, respectively, in women. Both measurements were significantly higher in men (p < 0.001). In total, 87 individuals (68%) had METD > 9.0 mm that could accommodate two 3.5-mm cortical screws. The mean MSL value and SPBA range were 34.4 ± 2.9 mm and 13.5°-24.2°, respectively, with no statistically significant difference between men and women. Conclusions: The insertion of two 3.5-mm cortical screws was possible for anterior fixation of odontoid fractures in 87 patients (68%) in our study, and there was a statistically significant difference between men and women.

Outcomes of Odontoid Process Fracture Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Odontoid fractures are found in two age groups. In younger patients, they occur following traffic accidents, falls from a height and during sports. In older patients with poor bone quality, they are usually caused by falls from one's own height. Most fractures are stable and do not require surgical treatment. Unstable, severely displaced fractures with neurological deficits require surgical treatment. The aim of the study was to evaluate the surgical and functional outcomes of treatment of odontoid fractures with a cannulated screw. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study enrolled 20 patients that underwent surgery in the years 2020-2022. The patients were divided into two groups: below 60 (group A) and over 60 years of age (group B). Patients were assessed at one day pre-op, one day post-op, 6 weeks following surgery and 3 months following surgery. Imaging studies were performed to assess the angulation and degree of displacement of bone fragments. After the fracture was surgically fixed with a cannulated screw, bone union and the stability of fracture fixation were assessed. Preoperative and postoperative pain intensity as per a VAS, functional status assessed with the NDI questionnaire, quality of life (EQ-VAS) and neurological status (ASIA scale) were compared. RESULTS: Good functional and surgical results were obtained in both groups of patients. Performance and quality of life improved, while pain intensity decreased in all patients. In 3 patients with post-traumatic paresis, the dysfunctions gradually subsided. No general medical or perioperative complications were observed. Bone union of the fracture was achieved in 40% of patients in group B and in 80% in group A. Achieving union did not determine the functional status of patients. On functional radiographs, all places of fixation were stable. CONCLUSIONS: 1. Odontoid fracture fixation with a single cannulated screw is a safe method of treatment. It provided a high union rate and good stability of the fracture. 2. Fracture non-union was noted more often in the group of older patients, but it did not negatively impact quality of life and performance.

Odontoid fracture in geriatric patients - analysis of complications and outcome following conservative treatment vs. ventral and dorsal surgery.

BACKGROUND: Different treatment options are discussed for geriatric odontoid fracture. The aim of this study was to compare the treatment options for geriatric odontoid fractures. METHODS: Included were patients with the following criteria: age ≥ 65 years, identification of seniors at risk (ISAR score ≥ 2), and odontoid fracture type A/B according to Eysel and Roosen. Three groups were compared: conservative treatment, surgical therapy with ventral screw osteosynthesis or dorsal instrumentation. At a follow-up examination, the range of motion and the trabecular bone fracture healing rate were evaluated. Furthermore, demographic patient data, neurological status, length of stay at the hospital and at the intensive care unit (ICU) as well as the duration of surgery and occurring complications were analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 72 patients were included and 43 patients could be re-examined (range: 2.7 ± 2.1 months). Patients with dorsal instrumentation had a better rotation. Other directions of motion were not significantly different. The trabecular bone fracture healing rate was 78.6%. The patients with dorsal instrumentation were hospitalized significantly longer; however, their duration at the ICU was shortest. There was no significant difference in complications. CONCLUSION: Geriatric patients with odontoid fracture require individual treatment planning. Dorsal instrumentation may offer some advantages.

C2 Odontoid Fracture Associated with C1-C2 Rotatory Dislocation: A Retrospective Analysis of 2 Surgical Techniques.

BACKGROUND: Odontoid fractures in association with a C1-C2 rotatory luxation reports are seldom found in the literature. The fusion between the lateral mass of C1 and C2 could be of interest to ensure adequate treatment in these particular cases. We report 23 cases where there was coexistence of an odontoid fracture and rotatory subluxation, which were treated surgically using cages between C1 and C2 or just traditional Goel-Harms technique. We evaluated the radiologic fusion rate, reoperation rate, and complications. METHODS: This was a single-center, retrospective, cohort study of patients with C2 fractures (mixed type and C1-C2 rotatory luxation according to the Fielding classification) who were treated surgically. Radiologic computed tomography scans were used to assess fusion (presence of bridging trabecular bone end plate or pseudoarthrosis) between 6 months and 1.5 years after the surgery. RESULTS: Twenty-three patients were diagnosed with C2 fractures and C1-C2 rotatory luxation that were treated surgically and were suitable for the analysis; 11 patients underwent C1-C2 fusion with intra-articular cages, and 12 underwent a classical Goel-Harms technique. The fusion rate at the C1-C2 joint was higher in the cages group. Only 12 patients exhibited fusion at the level of the odontoid fracture. CONCLUSIONS: C2 fractures associated with C1-C2 rotatory dislocation are rare. The fusion rate at the level of the odontoid in these patients appears to be lower than that reported in patients without rotatory dislocation. It may be of special interest to obtain a clear fusion at the C1-C2 joint, where this type of implant seems to offer an advantage.

The optimal treatment of type II and III odontoid fractures in the elderly: an updated meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: Odontoid fractures are the most common cervical spine fractures in the elderly, with a controversial optimal treatment. The objective of this review was to compare the outcome of surgical and conservative treatments in elderly (≥ 65 years), by updating a systematic review published by the authors in 2013. METHODS: A comprehensive search was conducted in seven databases. Clinical outcome was the primary outcome. Fracture union- and stability were secondary outcomes. Pooled point estimates and their respective 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were derived using the random-effects model. A random-effects multivariable meta-regression model was used to correct for baseline co-variates when sufficiently reported. RESULTS: Forty-one studies met the inclusion criteria, of which forty were case series and one a cohort study. No clinical differences in outcomes including the Neck Disability Index (NDI, 700 patients), Visual Analogue Scale pain (VAS, 180 patients), and Smiley-Webster Scale (SWS, 231 patients) scores were identified between surgical and conservative treatments. However, fracture union was higher in surgically treated patients (pooled incidence 72.7%, 95% CI 66.1%, 78.5%, 31 studies, 988 patients) than in conservatively treated patients (40.2%, 95% CI 32.0%, 49.0%, 22 studies, 912 patients). This difference remained after correcting for age and fracture type. Fracture stability (41 studies, 1917 patients), although numerically favoring surgery, did not appear to differ between treatment groups. CONCLUSION: While surgically treated patients showed higher union rates than conservatively treated patients, no clinically relevant differences were observed in NDI, VAS pain, and SWS scores and stability rates. These results need to be further confirmed in well-designed comparative studies with proper adjustment for confounding, such as age, fracture characteristics, and osteoporosis degree.

Type II Odontoid Fractures: Is the Anterior Screw a Good Solution for all Patients? A Case Series of 60 Consecutive Patients.

OBJECTIVE: Type II odontoid fracture is the most common fracture type, and its treatment remains challenging. The objective of this study was to evaluate the results of anterior screw fixation for type II odontoid fractures in patients aged over and below 60 years. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of consecutive patients diagnosed with type II odontoid fractures who were surgically treated using the anterior approach by a single surgeon was conducted. Demographic characteristics, including age, sex, type of fracture, time from trauma to surgery, length of stay (LoS), fusion rate, complications, and reoperation, were evaluated. Surgical outcomes were compared between patients over and below 60 years of age. RESULTS: Sixty consecutive patients underwent odontoid anterior fixation during the analysis period. The mean age of patients was 49.58 ± 23.22 years. Twenty-three (38.3%) patients were aged over 60 years, and the minimum follow-up period was two years. Of the patients, 93.3% developed bone fusion, which was observed in 86.9% of patients over 60 years. Complications related to hardware failure occurred in six (10%) patients. Transient dysphagia was observed in 10% of the cases. Three (5%) patients required reoperation. Patients over 60 years had a significantly increased risk of dysphagia compared with those below 60 years (P = 0.0248). There was no significant difference between the groups regarding nonfusion rate, reoperation rate, or LoS. CONCLUSIONS: Anterior fixation of the odontoid showed high fusion rates with a low rate of complications. It is a technique to be considered for treating type II odontoid fractures in selected cases.

Surgery Decreases Nonunion, Myelopathy, and Mortality for Patients With Traumatic Odontoid Fractures: A Propensity Score Matched Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Existing literature suggests that surgical intervention for odontoid fractures is beneficial but often does not control for known confounding factors. OBJECTIVE: To examine the effect of surgical fixation on myelopathy, fracture nonunion, and mortality after traumatic odontoid fractures. METHODS: We analyzed all traumatic odontoid fractures managed at our institution between 2010 and 2020. Ordinal multivariable logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with myelopathy severity at follow-up. Propensity score analysis was used to test the treatment effect of surgery on nonunion and mortality. RESULTS: Three hundred and three patients with traumatic odontoid fracture were identified, of whom 21.6% underwent surgical stabilization. After propensity score matching, populations were well balanced across all analyses (Rubin's B < 25.0, 0.5 < Rubin's R < 2.0). Controlling for age and fracture angulation, type, comminution, and displacement, the overall rate of nonunion was lower in the surgical group (39.7% vs 57.3%, average treatment effect [ATE] = -0.153 [-0.279, -0.028], P = .017). Controlling for age, sex, Nurick score, Charlson Comorbidity Index, Injury Severity Score, and selection for intensive care unit admission, the mortality rate was lower for the surgical group at 30 days (1.7% vs 13.8%, ATE = -0.101 [-0.172, -0.030], P = .005) and at 1 year was 7.0% vs 23.7%, ATE = -0.099 [-0.181, -0.017], P = .018. Cox proportional hazards analysis also demonstrated a mortality benefit for surgery (hazard ratio = 0.587 [0.426, 0.799], P = .0009). Patients who underwent surgery were less likely to have worse myelopathy scores at follow-up (odds ratio = 0.48 [0.25, 0.93], P = .029). CONCLUSION: Surgical stabilization is associated with better myelopathy scores at follow-up and causes lower rates of fracture nonunion, 30-day mortality, and 1-year mortality.

Does the intraoperative 3D-flat panel control of the planned implant position lead to an optimization and increased in safety in the anatomically demanding region C1/2?

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to evaluate the applicability and advantages of intraoperative imaging using a 3D flat panel in the treatment of C1/2 instabilities. MATERIALS: Prospective single-centered study including surgeries at the upper cervical spine between 06/2016 and 12/2018. Intraoperatively thin K-wires were placed under 2D fluoroscopic control. Then an intraoperative 3D-scan was carried out. The image quality was assessed based on a numeric analogue scale (NAS) from 0 to 10 (0 = worst quality, 10 = perfect quality) and the time for the 3D-scan was measured. Additionally, the wire positions were evaluated regarding malpositions. RESULTS: A total of 58 patients were included (33f, 25 m, average age 75.2 years, r.:18-95) with pathologies of C2: 45 type II fractures according to Anderson/D'Alonzo with or without arthrosis of C1/2, 2 Unhappy triad of C1/2 (Odontoid fracture Type II, anterior or posterior C1 arch-fracture, Arthrosis C1/2) 4 pathological fractures, 3 pseudarthroses, 3 instabilities of C1/2 because of rheumatoid arthritis, 1 C2 arch fracture). 36 patients were treated from anterior [29 AOTAF (combined anterior odontoid and transarticular C1/2 screw fixation), 6 lag screws, 1 cement augmented lag screw] and 22 patients from posterior (regarding to Goel/Harms). The median image quality was 8.2 (r.: 6-10). In 41 patients (70.7%) the image quality was 8 or higher and in none of the patients below 6. All of those 17 patients the image quality below 8 (NAS 7 = 16; 27.6%, NAS 6 = 1, 1.7%), had dental implants. A total of 148 wires were analyzed. 133 (89.9%) showed a correct positioning. In the other 15 (10.1%) cases a repositioning had to be done (n = 8; 5.4%) or it had to be drawn back (n = 7; 4.7%). A repositioning was possible in all cases. The implementation of an intraoperative 3D-Scan took an average of 267 s (r.: 232-310 s). No technical problems occurred. CONCLUSION: Intraoperative 3D imaging in the upper cervical spine is fast and easy to perform with sufficient image quality in all patients. Potential malposition of the primary screw canal can be detected by initial wire positioning before the Scan. The intraoperative correction was possible in all patients. Trial registration German Trials Register (Registered 10 August 2021, DRKS00026644-Trial registration: German Trials Register (Registered 10 August 2021, DRKS00026644- https://www.drks.de/drks_web/navigate.do?navigationId=trial.HTML&TRIAL_ID=DRKS00026644 ).

A Predictive Model to Identify Treatment-related Risk Factors for Odontoid Fracture Nonunion Using Machine Learning.

STUDY DESIGN: Multicenter retrospective analysis of routinely collected data. OBJECTIVE: The underlying aim of this study was to identify potential treatment-related risk factors for odontoid fracture nonunion while accounting for known patient- and injury-related risk factors. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Type II and III odontoid fractures represent the most common cervical spine fracture in elderly patients and are associated with a relatively high nonunion rate. The management of odontoid fractures is controversial and treatment strategies range from conservative treatment to extensive surgical stabilization and fusion. METHODS: A total of 415 individuals who sustained odontoid fracture and were treated in either of four tertiary referral centers in Austria and Germany were included in the study. We included the following potential contributing factors for fracture nonunion in cross-validated extreme gradient boosted (XGBoost) and binary logistic regression models: age, gender, fracture displacement, mechanism of injury (high vs. low energy), fracture classification (Anderson II vs. III), presence of comorbidities (Charlson comorbidity index), and treatment (conservative, anterior screw fixation with one or two screws, posterior C1/C2 spondylodesis, cervico-occipital C0-C4 fusion). RESULTS: In our cohort, 187 (45%) had radiologically confirmed odontoid nonunion six months postinjury. The odds for nonunion increase significantly with age, and are lower in type III compared to type II fractures. Also, odds for nonunion are significantly lower in posterior C1/C2 spondylodesis, and C0-C4 fusion compared to conservative treatment. Importantly, odds are not statistically significantly lower in the group treated with anterior screw fixation compared to conservative treatment. The factors gender, fracture displacement, mechanism of injury, and the presence of comorbidities did not produce significant odds. CONCLUSION: Higher age, type II fractures, and conservative treatment are the main risk factors for odontoid nonunion. Anterior screw fixation did not differ significantly from conservative treatment in terms of fracture union. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3.