Clinical and radiological union rate evaluation of type 2 odontoid fractures: A comparison between anterior screw fixation and halo vest in elderly patients

• Published in: Journal of craniovertebral junction and spine 2018-10, Vol.9 (4), p.254-259
• Main Authors: Girardo, Massimo, Rava, Alessandro, Gargiulo, Giosuè, Coniglio, Angela, Artiaco, Stefano, Massè, Alessandro, Fusini, Federico
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Cervical spine; Clinical outcomes; dens fracture; Fractures; halo vest; Mortality; Older people; Original; Osteoporosis; Patients; screw fixation; Spinal cord; Statistical analysis; Surgery; Trauma; X-rays
• ISSN: 0974-8237; 0976-9285
• DOI: 10.4103/jcvjs.jcvjs_93_18

Purpose: Odontoid fracture is a very common cervical injury, especially in elderly patients. Despite the high frequency, the appropriate management is still debated. The aim of this study is to evaluate clinical and radiological outcomes after anterior screw fixation or halo vest (HV) in type II odontoid fracture in elderly patients. Materials and Methods: Between January 2013 and December 2015, 135 consecutive patients affected by odontoid process were found. According to inclusion and exclusion criteria, 57 patients were included in the study. Patients were evaluated with visual analog scale (VAS), Smiley-Webster Scale (SWS), Italian Version of the Neck Disability Index (NDI), and patient satisfaction during follow-up. Furthermore, radiological data were evaluated for bone healing. Student's t-test or Fisher's exact test was used between groups, analyzing radiological and clinical results, and level of statistical significance was set at P < 0.05. Results: Seventeen patients were female and 40 were male. Twenty-seven patients were included in surgical group (SG) while 30 were included in HV group with a mean follow-up of 37.74 ± 10.52 months. A significant difference (P < 0.05) between groups was found for pseudoarthrosis, with a lower rate for SG. No significant differences in term of VAS, NDI, and SWS were found between groups (P > 0.05); SG reached higher satisfaction than HV group (P = 0.0271). Conclusions: Both treatments are equivalent in terms of clinical outcomes, and they are a valuable choice in the management of type II odontoid fracture. However, it must be considered that patients could slightly tolerate HV and may need a change of treatment.