Published in

American Association of Neurological Surgeons, Journal of Neurosurgery: Spine, 6(25), p. 675-680, 2016

DOI: 10.3171/2016.5.spine151459

Links

Tools

Export citation

Search in Google Scholar

Minimally invasive atlantoaxial fusion: cadaveric study and report of 5 clinical cases

Distributing this paper is prohibited by the publisher
Distributing this paper is prohibited by the publisher

Full text: Unavailable

Red circle
Preprint: archiving forbidden
Red circle
Postprint: archiving forbidden
Question mark in circle
Published version: policy unknown
Data provided by SHERPA/RoMEO

Abstract

OBJECTIVE Minimally invasive techniques are being increasingly used to treat disorders of the cervical spine. They have a potential to reduce the postoperative neck discomfort subsequent to extensive muscle dissection associated with conventional atlantoaxial fusion procedures. The aim of this paper was to elaborate on the technique and results of minimally invasive atlantoaxial fusion. MATERIALS Minimally invasive atlantoaxial fusion was done initially in 4 fresh-frozen cadavers and subsequently in 5 clinical cases. Clinical cases included patients with reducible atlantoaxial instability and undisplaced or minimally displaced odontoid fractures. The surgical technique is illustrated in detail. RESULTS Among the cadaveric specimens, all C-1 lateral mass screws were in the correct position and 2 of the 8 C-2 screws had a vertebral canal breach. Among clinical cases, all C-1 lateral mass screws were in the correct position. Only one C-2 screw had a Grade 2 vertebral canal breach, which was clinically insignificant. None of the patients experienced neurological worsening or implant-related complications at follow-up. Evidence of rib graft fusion or C1–2 joint fusion was successfully demonstrated in 4 cases, and flexion-extension radiographs done at follow-up did not show mobility in any case. CONCLUSIONS Minimally invasive atlantoaxial fusion is a safe and effective alternative to the conventional approach in selected cases. Larger series with direct comparison to the conventional approach will be required to demonstrate clinical benefit presumed to be associated with a minimally invasive approach.