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.

The Influence of Preoperative Interventions on Postoperative Surgical Wound Healing in Patients Without Risk Factors: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Poor wound healing and scar formation remain critical problems in daily surgical practice. Generally, most attention is paid to intra- and postoperative interventions to improve wound healing after surgery, while preoperative interventions remain unsatisfactorily explored. OBJECTIVES: In this systematic review, the available literature on the beneficial effects of preoperative interventions on wound healing and scar formation have been summarized and compared. METHODS: A comprehensive and systematic search has been conducted in MEDLINE, Pubmed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane, supplemented by reference and citation tracking. All preoperative interventions and all clinically relevant outcome parameters have been considered for inclusion, due to the expected limited availability of literature. RESULTS: A total of 13 studies were included, which were all randomized trials. No cohort studies or retrospective studies have been identified. All studies described different preoperative interventions and outcome parameters and could hence not be pooled and compared. Eight studies showed significantly better wound healing after a preoperative intervention. The individual studies have been summarized in this review. CONCLUSIONS: This systemic review shows that preoperative interventions can be beneficial in improving wound healing and scar formation. In selected cases, wound healing was found to benefit from a higher preoperative body temperature, topical vitamin E application, and low patient stress levels.

Rationale and design of the INNOVATE Trial: an international cooperative study on surgical versus conservative treatment for odontoid fractures in the elderly.

BACKGROUND: Fractures of the odontoid process of the axis are the most common fractures of the geriatric cervical spine. As the population ages, their incidence is expected to increase progressively, as is the number of very old patients (>80 years) with an odontoid fracture. No consensus exists on the optimal treatment (surgical or conservative) and the most relevant outcome parameter (osseous union, fracture stability or clinical outcome). The aim of the INNOVATE (INterNational study on Odontoid frActure Treatment in the Elderly) Trial is to prospectively assess fracture healing and clinical outcome after surgical and conservative treatment for odontoid fractures in the elderly patient, with a specific focus on the very old patient. METHODS/DESIGN: The trial is an observational study in which eleven centres in five European countries are involved. All patients admitted to one of these centres who meet the selection criteria (≥55 years, acute (

The optimal treatment of type II and III odontoid fractures in the elderly: a systematic review.

PURPOSE: Odontoid fractures are the most common cervical spine fractures in the elderly. As the population ages, their incidence is expected to increase progressively. The optimal treatment of this condition is still the subject of controversy. The objective of this review is to summarize and compare the outcome of surgical and conservative interventions in the elderly (≥ 65 years). METHODS: A comprehensive search was conducted in nine databases of medical literature, supplemented by reference and citation tracking. Clinical status was considered the primary outcome. Fracture union and stability rates were considered secondary outcomes. RESULTS: A total of nineteen studies met the inclusion criteria. All studies were performed retrospectively and were of limited quality. There was insufficient data, especially from direct comparisons, to determine the difference in clinical outcome between surgical and conservative interventions. Osseous union was achieved in 66-85 % of surgically treated patients and in 28-44 % of conservatively treated patients. Fracture stability was achieved in 82-97 % of surgically patients and in 53-79 % of conservatively treated patients. CONCLUSIONS: There was insufficient data to determine a potential difference in clinical outcome between different treatment groups. Surgically treated patients showed higher osseous union rates compared to conservatively treated patients, possibly because of different selection mechanisms. The majority of patients appears to achieve fracture stability regardless of the applied treatment. A prospective trial with appropriate sample size is needed to identify the optimal treatment of odontoid fractures in the elderly and predictors for the success of either one of the available treatments.

Low-Threshold-For-Surgery Versus Primarily-Conservative Treatment for Odontoid Fractures in the Elderly: Evaluating Practice Variation in The Netherlands.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. OBJECTIVES: Odontoid fractures are the most common cervical spine fractures in the elderly. The optimal treatment remains controversial. The aim of this study was to compare results of a low-threshold-for-surgery strategy (surgery for dislocated fractures in relatively healthy patients) to a primarily-conservative strategy (for all patients). METHODS: Patient records from 5 medical centers were reviewed for patients who met the selection criteria (e.g. age ≥55 years, type II/III odontoid fractures). Demographics, fracture types/characteristics, fracture union/stability, clinical outcome and mortality were compared. The influence of age on outcome was studied (≥55-80 vs ≥80 years). RESULTS: A total of 173 patients were included: 120 treated with low-threshold-for-surgery (of which 22 primarily operated, and 23 secondarily) vs 53 treated primarily-conservative. No differences in demographics and fracture characteristics between the groups were identified. Fracture union (53% vs 43%) and fracture stability (90% vs 85%) at last follow-up did not differ between groups. The majority of patients (56%) achieved clinical improvement compared to baseline. Analysis of differences in clinical outcome between groups was infeasible due to data limitations. In both strategies, patients ≥80 years achieved worse union (64% vs 30%), worse stability (97% vs 77%), and - as to be expected - increased mortality <104 weeks (2% vs 22%). CONCLUSIONS: Union and stability rates did not differ between the treatment strategies. Advanced age (≥80 years) negatively influenced both radiological outcome and mortality. No cases of secondary neurological deficits were identified, suggesting that concerns for the consequences of under-treatment may be unjustified.