Alexandria Journal of Medicine
Volume 47, Issue 3 , Pages 185-192, September 2011

Occipitocervical fixation in the management of craniocervical instabilities

  • Ihab Zidan

      Affiliations

    • Corresponding Author InformationCorresponding author. Address: 15 Mohamed Massoud St., Wabour Elmiah, Alexandria, Egypt. Tel.: +20 0123558137.
    • ,
  • Wael Fouad

Department of Neurosurgery, Faculty of Medicine, Alexandria University, Egypt

Received 5 June 2011; accepted 1 July 2011.

Article Outline

Abstract 

Introduction

The occipitocervical junction presents a unique, complex, biomechanical interface between the cranium and the upper cervical spine. Occipitocervical fixation has undergone significant evolution due to advances in operative techniques and instrumentation techniques.

Objective

This study was done to evaluate clinical picture, radiographic findings and results of occipitocervical fusion in 10 patients with craniocervical instabilities. Also to compare these results with other results reported in the literature.

Methods

This retrospective study reviewed 10 patients who underwent occipitocervical fixation for craniocervical instabilities between April 2007 and October 2010 in Alexandria hospitals. There were 7 males and 3 females and their ages ranged from 16 to 63years with mean age of 42.1years. As regards the clinical presentation, all patients had presented with neck pain before surgery, 8 patients (80%) with myelopathy, and 8 patients (80%) had presented with a neurological deficit either motor or sensory or both. The etiologies of occipitocervical instability in this study were trauma in three patients, rheumatoid arthritis in three patients, tumor in two patients and Down syndrome in two patients. All patients had preoperative craniocervical plain X-ray, CT and MRI examination. All patients underwent occipitocervical fixation surgery with various fixation systems and autologous bone grafts for fusion. Fusion was assessed by plain cervical X-ray films and CT scan, and the neurological outcome by Frankel grade. The mean follow-up period was 14.7months (range, 4–24months) including both clinical and radiological examinations.

Results

There were no operative mortalities or vascular injuries in this series. Two patients showed transient neurological deterioration postoperatively that had resolved within three months. Two cases had superficial wound infection and one case had cerebrospinal fluid leak. The mean operation time was 207min (range 130–320min) and the mean volume of blood loss was 354mL (range 120–750mL). Neck pain improved in all patients and no new instability developed at adjacent levels. Regarding the Frankel grade, five patients had shown improvement (Three patients improved from Frankel grade C to grade D, one patient from grade A to grade B and one patient from grade D to grade E), while five patients remained stationary at the same grade. At the last follow-up examination period, a solid fusion was achieved in nine patients out of ten (90%).

Conclusion

Occiptocervical fixation is indicated in the management of craniocervical instabilities resulting from trauma, rheumatoid arthritis, tumors and congenital anomalies of the craniocervical junction. Accurate imaging studies and proper patient selection are the keys to a successful outcome. Occipitocervical fusion procedures can be performed with low morbidity. A comprehensive knowledge of the anatomy of the occipital-cervical junction is imperative. A wide variety of stabilization techniques and instrumentation systems are currently available, each of which has its own advantages and disadvantages.

Keywords: Occipitocervical fixation, Craniocervical instabilities, Instrumentation

 

Back to Article Outline

1. Introduction 

The occipitocervical junction presents a unique, complex, biomechanical interface between the cranium and the upper cervical spine.1 Occipitocervical fusion is performed primarily in craniocervical instability due to congenital and post-traumatic deformities, infections, tumors and inflammatory conditions.2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9

Occipitocervical instability may manifest as disabling pain, cranial nerve dysfunction, paralysis, or even sudden death. Stabilization and fusion is required to prevent these complications. Occipitocervical fusion and instrumentation is a technically challenging procedure that can be accomplished successfully with careful attention to local anatomy and working knowledge of the various fixation options. The aim in occipitocervical fixation is to avoid injuring the nerve root, the spinal cord and the vertebral artery, and to obtain rigid fusion.10 Absence or hypoplasia of the occipital bone and co morbidities that would prevent an operative procedure or the prone positioning are contraindications for occipitocervical fusion.2

Occipitocervical fixation has undergone significant evolution due to advances in operative techniques and instrumentation techniques. This procedure has evolved from simple autograft on lay fusion techniques to sublaminar wiring techniques and, most recently, rigid occipital plating with bicortical screws connected via rods to atlantoaxial or subaxial screw fixation.3, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17

This study was aimed to evaluate clinical picture, radiographic findings and results of occipitocervical fusion in 10 patients with craniocervical instabilities. Also to compare these results with other results reported in the literature.

Back to Article Outline

2. Methods 

This retrospective study was carried out on 10 patients who underwent occiptocervical fixation in Alexandria hospitals between April 2007 and October 2010. Their medical records and imaging studies were reviewed. There were 7 males and 3 females and their ages ranged from 16 to 63years with mean age of 42.1years.

As regards the clinical presentation, all patients had presented with neck pain before surgery, 8 patients with myelopathy, and 8 patients had presented with a neurological deficit either motor or sensory or both (Frankel classification of these 10 patients are shown in Table 1).

Table 1. Frankel classification of 10 patients with occipitocervical instability.
Frankel gradeNo. of cases
Preop.Postop.
A=complete paralysis1
B=sensory function only below the injury level12
C=incomplete motor function below injury level3
D=fair to good motor function below injury level35
E=normal function23

The etiologies of occipitocervical instability in this study were trauma in three patients, rheumatoid arthritis in three patients, tumor in two patients and Down syndrome in two patients. All cases had preoperative craniocervical plain X-ray, CT and MRI examination. Preoperative traction was performed in two patients; one patient with trauma and the other with rheumatoid arthritis. All patients wore rigid neck collar postoperatively until fusion was achieved.

All patients underwent occipitocervical fixation surgery with various fixation systems and autologous bone grafts for fusion. All patients received awake intubation, and the surgical position was prone. The incisions were at midline, from external occipital protuberance to cervical area. After adequate exposure of suboccipital and posterior cervical areas, The methods used for occipitocervical fixation included; sublaminar wires and cables in three cases, wire-rod system in two cases and screw-rod system in five cases.

Cervical laminectomy was done in three cases depending on the clinical and radiological findings. Finally, the autologous bone grafts harvested from posterior iliac crest were put between C1 and C2 or posterolaterally. Transoral decompression was performed in one patient with basilar invagination due to rheumatoid arthritis prior to the posterior fixation procedure.

The Frankel grade (Table 1) was used to assess neurological outcome postoperatively. Fusion was assessed by plain cervical X-ray films and CT scan. Fusion was defined as successful if 2 criteria were met: (1) there was no relative movement between the fused motion segments in dynamic views of cervical X-ray; (2) the bone grafts became a uniform bone mass in imaging studies. The mean follow-up period was 14.7months (range, 4–24months).

Summary data for these 10 patients are listed in Table 2

Table 2. Summary data of 10 patients who underwent occiptocervical fixation.
NoAgeSexClinical pictureEtiologyRadiological findingsPreop. tractinExtent of fixationTechnique of surgeryPostoperative complicationsFrankel grading scale preop/postopFusion time (ms)
Neck painMyel-opathyN D
Follow up (months)
148M+++TumourC1 C2 erosion+spinal compression C0+C2–C5C 1Laminectomy Wire rod systemWound infectionC→D 12m6
257F+++TumourC1 C2 erosion+spinal compression C0+C3–C5C1 C2 laminectomy Rod-screw system (C3,4,5 lateral mass)Neurological deficitC→D 10m4
363M+ RAAAS+SMO+SAS C0+C3+C5Rod-screw system (C3,5 lateral mass) E→E 6m4
454F+ RAAAS+SMO+SAS C0+C1–C4Wire – rod system E→E 18m5
541M+++RAAAS+SMO+SAS+C0+C1–C4Rod-screw system (C1,3,4 lateral mass+C2 pedicle)+TOWound infectionD→E 4m
616M+++Down SyndromeAAS+AOD C0–C2Sublaminar wireNeurological deficitD→D 24m8
728M+ +Down SyndromeAAS+AOD C0–C2Sublaminar cable D→D 16m8
835M+++TraumaAAS+C2 fracture (pedicle+lamina)+C0+C1+C3Sublaminar wire A→B 20m7
954F+++TraumaAAS+C2 C3 Sublaxation .+fracture C1 posterior arch C0–C3C1 laminectomy Rod-screw system (C1+C3 lateral mass+C2 pedicle screw)CSF leakC→D 22m5
1025M+++TraumaAAS+fracture C1 lateral mass C0+C2–C3Rod-screw system (C2 pedicle+C3 lateral mass) B→B 15m6

SAS, subaxial sublaxation; AOD, atlanto-occipital dislocation; ND, neurological deficit; AAS, atlantoaxial subluxation; RA, rheumatoid arthritis; Preop, preoperative; postop, postoperative; C, cervical; C0, occiput; m, months; TO, Transoral odontoidectomy; SMO, superior migration of odontoid.

Back to Article Outline

3. Results 

The most common pattern of occipitocervical instability in this study was atlantoaxial sublaxation observed in eight patients (80%). Subaxial cervical instability was associated to occipitocervical instability in four cases (40%). In the present study, occipitocervical fixation was performed from occiput to C2 in two cases, occiput to C4 in two cases, occiput+C3 to C5 in one case, Occiput+C3+C5 in one case, occiput+C1+C3 in one case, occiput+C2+C3 in one case, occiput+C2 to C5 in one case, and occiput to C3 in one case (Table 2). The mean operation time was 207min (range 130–320min) and the mean volume of blood loss was 354mL (range 120–750mL).

Perioperative mortalities and morbidity 

There were no operative mortalities or vascular injuries in this series. Two patients showed transient neurological deterioration postoperatively that had resolved within three months. Two cases had superficial wound infection; one of them responded to antibiotic treatment and the other required surgical debridement. CSF leak occurred in one case that stopped with conservative measures in the form of lumbar puncture and diuretics.

Outcome of cases 

Patients with preoperative complaint of neck pain respond well to surgery with complete resolution in all cases (100%). On contrast only 37.5% of the patients with myelopathic manifestations had improved (three patients out of eight). At the last follow up postoperative examination period, five patients had improved (Three patients improved from Frankel grade C to grade D, one patient from Frankel grade A to grade B and one patient from Frankel grade D to grade E), while five patients remained stationary at the same Frankel grade (Table 3). No new instability developed at adjacent levels in the follow-up radiographs. A solid fusion was achieved in nine patients out of ten (90% of the cases). The mean fusion time of these 9 patients was 5.3months (range, 4–8months).

Table 3. Outcome of patients in relation to the etiology and the technique of fixation.
OutcomeCasesSurgical techniqueEtiology
No.%InstrumentationNo.Rheumatoid arthritisTraumaTumourDown syndrome
Improved550Sublaminar wire and cable1
Wire-rod system1 1
Rod screw system3111
Stationary550Sublaminar wire and cable2 2
Wire-rod system11
Rod screw system211
Deteriorated00
Total10 103322

Back to Article Outline

4. Discussion 

The craniocervical junction is the most mobile of the upper cervical spine especially in children. It is uniquely adapted for stability and motion.18 Occipitocervical instability may be caused by trauma, rheumatoid arthritis, neoplastic disease, inflammatory disease and congenital anomalies. The common result of occipitocervical instability is cervicomedullary neural tissue compression, with development of symptoms and signs of cervical radiculomyelopathy and brain stem compression as well as deformities of the craniocervical region.19, 20 The solution to occipitocervical instability is occipitocervical fixation with bone fusion. The goals of occipitocervical fixation are regaining normal alignment, ensuring adequate neural tissue decompression and achieving structural stability. Occipitocervical fixation is a challenging field in spinal surgery. Many techniques for occipitocervical fixation had been reported in the literature21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29 using various internal fixation instruments.

This study focused on occipitocervical fixation whether traumatic or non traumatic. Similar reports in the literature were found to be matching with this study as Hsu et al.20, Ogihara et al.30, and Song et al.31 series, while other reports were focused either on traumatic cases alone as Lee et al.32 series or non traumatic cases as in Bongartz et al.33 and Motosuneya et al.34 series.

Like the previously published series20, 32, 33 neck pain was a main presenting symptom in all cases of occipitocervical instability. Neurological deficit (motor, sensory or both) and myelopathy were also found to be a common clinical presentation in this study (80% with neurological deficit and 80% with myelopathy). Although cranial nerve deficit and ventilation impairment were not a presenting feature in this series, others19, 35 had reported in their cases.

Trauma and rheumatoid arthritis were the most frequent causes of occipitocervical instability in this study (three cases each) followed by tumor and Down syndrome (two cases each). This was consistent with what was reported by Song et al.31 who operated 32 patients with craniocervical instabilities and found that trauma and rheumatoid arthritis were the main etiology in 22 cases.

The indication of occipitocervical fixation in the traumatic cases was atlantoaxial sublaxation in two cases (Fig. 1) and atlantoaxial sublaxation associated with C2–C3 sublaxation in the third case. Atlantoaxial fixation was not feasible in these cases (due to fractured C1 posterior arch in one case, C1 lateral mass fracture in the second case, fracture C2 pedicle and lamina in the third case) and occipitocervical fixation was mandatory. This was consistent with what was found in the literature.30, 32 Other indications of occipitocervical fixation in trauma cases include; atlantooccipital dislocation, C1–C2 instability which cannot be completely reduced, patients who have had a transoral odontoidectomy, those who have an incompetent C1 lamina or abnormal course of the vertebral artery, all of which make a C1–C2 posterior fusion impossible.36, 37, 38, 39

  • View full-size image.
  • Figure 1. 

    (A) Preoperative plain-Xray cervical spine (lateral view) showing traumatic atlantoaxial sbaxation. (B) Preoperative CT scan (sxial view) showing fracture of both anerior and posterior arch of Atlas. (C) Preoperative MRI T2 weighted image (sagittal view) showing ligamentos injry and swelling of prevertebral tisse at the atlatoxial region. (D) Postoperative plain X-raycervical spine (lateral view) and (axial view) showing ocipitocervical fixation (C0C2C3).

The second common cause of occipitocervical instability in this series was rheumatoid arthritis that found in three patients (Fig. 2). Rheumatoid arthritis of the cervical spine leads to a spectrum of joint erosions and deformity resulting in spinal stability. The most common patterns of cervical instability seen in rheumatoid arthritis are atlantoaxial subluxation (AAS), followed by basilar invagination (superior migration of odontoid=SMO) and subaxial subluxation (SAS). Combined patterns of cervical instabilities are not uncommon in rheumatoid arthritis.40, 41, 42, 43 The indications of occipitocervical fusion in the three rheumatoid patients in this study was the combination of AAS, SMO and SAS. This was consistent with the indications mentioned in Pham et al.44 series in which occipitocervical fixation was performed in 18 patients with rheumatoid arthritis.

  • View full-size image.
  • Figure 2. 

    (A) Preoperative plain-Xray cervical spine (lateral view and AP view) of patient with rheumatoid arthritis showing atlantoaxial sublaxation. (B) Preoperative MRI T2 weighted image (sagittal view) showing compression at cervicomedullary junction. (C) Postoperative plain X-ray cervical spine (lateral view) showing occipitocervical fixation (C0C3C5)

Metastatic spine tumors occur in 5–10% of all cancer patients.45 Cervical spine involvement is relatively uncommon, accounting for less than 10% of all spinal metastases. The most prevalent tumors are lung, breast, prostate, kidney, and thyroid.46 Two cases of metastatic cervical tumors were included in this series; one male suffered from metastasis from lymphoma and the second was a female with metastatic tumor from breast cancer. In these two cases there was a variable degree of neoplastic destruction of C1 and C2 vertebrae with a resultant compression of the cervicomedullary junction. Cervical laminectomy and decompression were needed in these two cases together with occipitocervical fixation (Fig. 3). These findings correspond to the results of Hsu et al.,20 Song et al.31 and Bongartz et al.33 who performed occipitocervical fixation for similar pathologies.

  • View full-size image.
  • Figure 3. 

    (A) Preoperative plain-Xray cervical spine (lateral view) showing neoplastic destruction of C1 C2 (B) Preoperative MRI T1 weighted image (sagittal view) showing neoplastic mass at C1 C2. (C) Preoperative MRI T2 weighted image (sagittal view) showing neoplastic mass at C1 C2 Postoperative plain X-ray cervical spine (lateral view) showing occipitocervical fixation (C0 C2 C3 C4 C5 fixation) and C1 laminectomy.

Two patients with Down syndrome were operated upon in this series for occipitocervical fusion. Atlantoaxial subluxation was the main pathology in these two cases accompanied by atlantooccipital subluxation. Down syndrome is the commonest inherited chromosomal disorder occurring in 1 in 660 live births. Children and adults with Down syndrome are prone to cervical spine disease, including instability, although the natural history is unclear. The majority of pathology occurs at the craniocervical junction particularly at the atlantoaxial and atlantooccipital joints.47, 48 About 1% only of all patients with Down syndrome who present with instabilities that require surgical intervention.49

Various systems had been developed for internal fixation of the occipitocervical spine including; sublaminar wires and cables, wire-rod construct, hook-rod system, plate-screw system, and rod-screw system.50 The methods of occipitocervical fixation used in this series included; sublaminar wires and cables in three cases, wire-rod system in two cases and screw-rod system in five cases.

The sublaminar wire and cable method is an easy and simple method however is not indicated after laminectomy or laminoplasty because the wires cannot be anchored at the laminae. In addition, passing a wire under the lamina may cause spinal cord injury during the procedure and possibly spinal cord compression due to recoil of the wire. Also passing wire through the occiput can be dangerous because the incidence of dural tears reported with this procedure was 25%.27

Sonntag and Dickman22 described the wire-rod technique; they used a grooved titanium fixation rod which was bent into a “U” shape and contoured to fit the cervical curvature and fixed to the occipital bone and cervical laminae using wires. This construct also needs intact posterior cervical elements for sublaminar wiring, and is not suitable for patients whose posterior elements are defective or have to be removed for decompression. The advantages of the wire-rod construct include being technically simple, safe and economical. For patients with poor bone quality, such as rheumatoid arthritis with osteoporosis, this technique may be the surgery of choice because the screw purchase is not secured. However the wire rod construct does not provide immediate postoperative stability and postoperative rigid external fixation such as halo-vest is necessary, usually for at least 12weeks.11, 23

Recently the screw-based construct (plate-screw system, rod-screw system) for occipitocervical fixation had been developed. This system fixes the occipital bone to the atlantoaxial and subaxial cervical spine through plates or rods. Transarticular C1–C2 screws, C1 lateral mass screws, C2 pedicle screws and subaxial lateral mass screws are the most commonly used with occiput fixation and have shown to increase construct rigidity of occipitocervical fixation.51 The screw-based construct (plate-screw system, rod-screw system) provides immediate postoperative stability, so postoperative rigid external fixation is not needed in most cases, which makes patients more comfortable.24, 25, 27, 28 This construct provides more rigidity biomechanically than the wire-rod construct, and can be applied to patients whose posterior elements are defective or need to be removed for decompression. The disadvantages include potential vertebral artery and cervical root injury due to cervical screw purchase, consequently these techniques should be considered technically demanding.51, 52, 53 Potential vascular injuries with occipitocervical fixation include excessive venous hemorrhage and vertebral artery injury. These complications are especially frequent in patients with severe deformity or shortening of the vertebral body and misalignment of the spinal column. Most vascular complications occur during the exposure of the C1 lateral mass or the C2 pars interarticularis and introduction of screws.54, 55, 56 There were no operative mortalities or vascular injuries in this series. These findings correspond to the results of Bongartz series33 in which nine patients were operated for occipitocervical fusion without any vascular complications. However the screw-based construct is expensive and not suitable in patients with poor bone quality as occurred in one patient with rheumatoid arthritis in whom C1 C2 C4 screws could not be applied

In this study two patients showed transient neurological deterioration postoperatively. In one of them, the neurological deterioration was believed to be related to the introduction of the sublaminar wires while in the second, laminectomy in a stenotic canal may be the cause. However the neurological deterioration in these two patients was transient and both had shown improvement with conservative treatment and physiotherapy. Such complications had been reported in the literature57 to be associated with occipitocervical fixation. Two cases had superficial wound infection in this series. One case was treated successfully using the proper antibiotic after performing culture and sensitivity from the wound, while the second patient was diabetic and required a surgical debridement with the antibiotic management. Similarly Hsu and colleagues20 who retrospectively reviewed 9 patients with occipitocervical fixation had reported a case of wound infection. One case with cerebrospinal fluid leak was reported in this study. Intraoperative dural tear was found in one of traumatic cases with fracture of posterior arch of atlas that was repaired immediately. However CSF leak had occurred postoperatively but responded well to repeated lumbar puncture and diuretics. This finding was not consistent with Ogihara et al.30 who treated 23 patients with disorders at the craniocervical junction that required posterior occipitocervical reconstruction and did not report any case of CSF leak. In this study, the mean operation time was 207min (range 130–320min) and the mean volume of blood loss was 354mL (range 120–750mL. Similar to this study, Motosuneya et al.34 in their series of 11 patients who had undergone occipitocervical fusion for non-traumatic upper cervical instability had reported a mean operative time of 189min (range 120–240min), and a mean volume of blood loss of 297mL (range 135–850mL). While in Ogihara et al30 series of twenty three patients with occipitocervical fusion, the mean operative time was averaged 350min (range 163–660min) and the mean intraoperative blood loss 579 (range 20–1870mL).

In this study, neck pain had improved in all patients while myelopathic manifestations had improved in three patients (37.5%). Three patients improved from Frankel grade C to grade D, one patient from Frankel grade A to grade B and one patient from Frankel grade D to grade E while the other patients remained at the same Frankel grade. In Lee and colleagues32 series in which 16 patients with traumatic upper cervical spinal instability were operated for occipitocervical fixation; three patients improved from Frankel grade D to grade E while other patients remained at the same Frankel grade. Many authors had reported a high incidence of successful postoperative fusion (range from 75% to 100%) with occipitocervical fixation regardless the fusion method and underlying pathologies.25, 38 In the present study, successful fusion had occurred in nine patients (90% fusion rate). Only one patient with rheumatoid arthritis did not show any signs of fusion at the last follow up period after 4months. This patient was the last patient in this study and there was no enough time to follow him for a longer period where a successful fusion can still occur. The mean fusion time in this series was 5.3months (range 4–8months) which is similar to that reported in other series.20 No new instability developed at adjacent levels in the follow-up radiographs of our patients.

Back to Article Outline

5. Conclusion 

Occiptocervical fixation is indicated in the management of craniocervical instabilities resulting from trauma, rheumatoid arthritis, tumors and congenital anomalies of the craniocervical junction. Accurate imaging studies and proper patient selection are the keys to a successful outcome. Occipitocervical fusion procedures can be performed with low morbidity. A comprehensive knowledge of the anatomy of the occipital-cervical junction is imperative. A wide variety of stabilization techniques and instrumentation systems are currently available, each of which has its own advantages and disadvantages.

Back to Article Outline

Reference 

  1. Vender JR, Houle PJ, Harrison S, et al. Occipital-cervical fusion using the Locksley intersegmental tie bar technique: long-term experience with 19 patients. Spine J. 2002;2:134–141
  2. Randazzo CG, LeBude B, Ratliff J, et al. Occiput–Cervical Fixation. Spine Trauma, Part 1. 2010;119:127
  3. Abumi K, Avadhani A, Manu A, et al. Occipitocervical fusion. Eur Spine J. 2010;19:355–356
  4. Guiot B, Fessler RG. Complex atlantoaxial fractures. J Neurosurg (Spine 2). 1999;91:139–143
  5. Visocchi M, Rocco FD, Meglio M. Craniocervical junction instability: instrumentation and fusion with titanium rods and sublaminar wires. Effectivenes and failures in personal experience. Acta Neurochir. 2003;145:265–272
  6. Dickman CA, Papadopoulos SM, Sonntag VKH, et al. Traumatic occipitoatlantal dislocations. J Spinal Disor. 1993;6:300–313
  7. Shen FH, Samartzis D, Jenis LG, et al. Rheumatoid arthritis: evaluation, surgical management of the cervical spine. Spine J. 2004;689:700
  8. Labler L, Eid K, Platz A, et al. Atlanto-occipital dislocation: four case reports of survival in adults and review of the literature. Eur Spine J. 2004;13(2):172–180
  9. Koller H, Holz U, Assuncao A, et al. Traumatic Atlantooccipital Dislocation Critical Review: Diagnosis, Classification and Treatment, and Explanative Case Report. European J of Trauma 2006; 32: 271–9. 3- Abumi K, Avadhani A, Manu A, et al. Occipitocervical fusion. Eur Spine J. 2010;19:355–356
  10. Vaccaro A, Lim M, Lee J. Indications for surgery and stabilization techniques of the occipito-cervical junction. Injury Int J Care Injured. 2005;36:SB44–SB53
  11. Baskin JJ, Dickman CA, Sonntag VKH. Occipitocervical fusion. In:  Winn HR,  Dacey RG editor. Youmans Neurological Surgery. Philadelphia: Saunders; 2004;p. 4655–4670
  12. Ebraheim NA, Elgafy H, Xu R. Bone graft harvesting from iliac and fibular donor sites: techniques and complications. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2001;9:210–218
  13. Abumi K, Takada T, Shono Y, et al. Posterior occipitocervical reconstruction using cervical pedicle screws and plate-rod systems. Spine. 1999;24:1425–1434
  14. Faure A, Bord E, Monteiro da Silva R, et al. Occipitocervical fixation with a single occipital clamp using inverted hooks. Eur Spine J. 1998;7:80–83
  15. Heidecke V, Rainov NG, Burkert W. Occipito-cervical fusion with the cervical Cotrel-Dubousset rod system. Acta Neurochir. 1998;140:969–976
  16. Korovessis P, Katonis P, Aligizakis A, et al. Posterior compact Cotrel-Dubousset instrumentation for occipitocervical, cervical and cervicothoracic fusion. Eur Spine J. 1998;10:385–394
  17. Paquis P, Breuil V, Lonjon M, et al. Occipitocervical fixation using hooks and screws for upper cervical instability. Neurosurgery. 1999;44:324–331
  18. Menezes AH, Traynelis VC. Anatomy and biomechanics of normal craniovertebral junction (a) and biomechanics of stabilization (b). Nerv Syst. 2008;24:1091–1100
  19. Nockels RP, Shaffrey CI, Kanter AS, et al. Occipitocervical fusion with rigid internal fixation: long-term follow-up data in 69 patients. J Neurosurg Spine. 2007;7:117–123
  20. Hsu YH, Liang ML, Yen YS, et al. Use of Screw-Rod System in Occipitocervical Fixation. J Chin Med Assoc. 2009;72(1):20–28
  21. Wolfla CE. Anatomical, biomechanical, and practical considerations in posterior occipitocervical instrumentation. Spine J. 2006;6:225S–232S
  22. Sonntag VK, Dickman CA. Craniocervical stabilization. Clin Neurosurg. 1993;40:243–272
  23. Vender JR, Rekito AJ, Harrison SJ, et al. The evolution of posterior cervical, occipitocervical fusion, instrumentation. Neurosurg Focus. 2004;16:E9
  24. Deutsch H, Haid RW, Rodts GE, et al. Occipitocervical fixation: long-term results. Spine. 2005;30:530–535
  25. Oda I, Abumi K, Sell LC, et al. Biomechanical evaluation of five different occipito-atlanto-axial fixation techniques. Spine. 1999;24:2377–2382
  26. Lee SC, Chen JF, Lee ST. Complications of fixation to the occiput—anatomical and design implications. Br J Neurosurg. 2004;18:590–597
  27. Sutterlin CE, Bianchi JR, Kunz DN, et al. Biomechanical evaluation of occipitocervical fixation devices. J Spinal Dis. 2001;14:185–192
  28. Currier BL, Papagelopoulos PJ, Neale PG, et al. Biomechanical evaluation of new posterior occipitocervical instrumentation system. Clin Orthop Rel Res. 2003;411:103–115
  29. Stock GH, Vaccaro AR, Brown AK, et al. Contemporary posterior occipital fixation. J Bone Jt Surg Am. 2006;88:1642–1649
  30. Ogihara N, Takahashi J, Hirabayashi H, et al. Long-term results of computer-assistedposterior occipitocervical reconstruction. World Neurosurg. 2010;73(6):722–728
  31. Song GC, Cho KS, Yoo DS, et al. Surgical Treatment of Craniovertebral Junction Instability: Clinical Outcomes and Effectiveness in Personal Experience. J Korean Neurosurg Soc. 2010;48:37–45
  32. Lee SC, Chen JF, Lee ST. Clinical experience with rigid occipitocervical fusion in the management of traumatic upper cervical spinal instability. Journal of Clinical Neuroscience. 2006;13:193–198
  33. Bongartz EB. Two asymmetric contoured plate-rods for occipito-cervical fusion. Eur Spine J. 2004;13(3):266–273
  34. Motosuneya T, Hirabayashi S, Yamada H, et al. Occipitocervical fusion usin g a hook and rod system between cervical levels C2 and C3. J Clin Neurosci. 2009;16:909–913
  35. Koller H, Holz U, Assuncao A, et al. Traumatic Atlantooccipital Dislocation Critical Review: Diagnosis, Classification and Treatment, and Explanative Case Report. Eur J Trauma. 2006;32:271–279
  36. Sasso RC, Jeanneret B, Fischer K, et al. Occipitocervical fusion with posterior plate and screw instrumentation: a long term follow-up study. Spine. 1994;19:2364–2368
  37. Huckell CB, Buchowski JM, Richardson WJ, et al. Functional outcome of plate fusions for disorders of the occipitocervical junction. Clin Ortho Rel Res. 1999;359:136–145
  38. Vale FL, Oliver M, Cahill DW. Rigid occipitocervical fusion. J Neurosurg (Spine 2). 1999;91:144–150
  39. Madawi AA, Casey ATH, Solanki GA, et al. Radiological and anatomical evaluation of the atlantoaxial transarticular screw fixation technique. J Neurosurg. 1997;86:961–968
  40. Shen FH, Samartzis D, Jenis LG, et al. Rheumatoid arthritis: evaluation and surgical management of the cervical spine. Spine J. 2004;4:689–700
  41. Kolen ER, Schmidt MH. Rheumatoid arthritis of the cervical spine. Semin Neurol. 2002;22:179–186
  42. Boden SD, Dodge LD, Bohlman HH, et al. Rheumatoid arthritis of the cervical spine. A long-term analysis with predictors of paralysis and recovery. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1993;75:1282–1297
  43. Clark CR, Goetz DD, Menezes AH. Arthrodesis of the cervical spine in rheumatoid arthritis. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1989;71:381–392
  44. Pham XV, Bancel P, Menkes CJ, et al. Upper cervical spine surgery in rheumatoid arthritis: retrospective study of 30 patients followed for two years or more after Cotrel- Dubousset instrumentation. Joint Bone Spine. 2000;67:434–440
  45. Hammerberg K. Surgical treatment of metastatic spine disease. Spine. 1992;17:1148–1153
  46. Tolli T, Cammisa F, Lane J, Martin T. Metastatic disease of the spine. In:  Wiesel S,  Boden S editor. Seminars in Spine Surgery. Philadelphia, PA: WB Saunders; 1995;p. 277–287Vol. 7
  47. Ross J, Myles L. Cervical spine problems in children. Curr Orthopaed. 2006;20:274–285
  48. Crostelli M, Mariani M, Mazza O, et al. Cervical fixation in the pediatric patient: our experience. Eur Spine J. 2009;18:S20–S28
  49. Weber U, Robinson Y, Kayser R. Rare pathological alterations of the upper cervical spine requiring surgical treatment. Orthopade J. 2006;35(3):296–305
  50. Winegar CD, Lawrence JP, Friel BC, et al. A systematic review of occipital cervical fusion: techniques and outcomes. J Neurosurg Spine. 2010;13(1):5–16
  51. Gabrie J, Muzumdar AM, Khalil S, et al. A novel crossed rod configuration incorporating translaminar screws for occipitocervical internal fixation: an in vitro biomechanical study. Spine J. 2011;11:30–35
  52. Puttlitz CM, Melcher RP, Kleinstueck FS, Harms J, Braford DS, Lotz JC. Stability analysis of craniovertebral junction fixation techniques. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2004;86A:561–568
  53. Shad A, Shariff SS, Teddy PJ, Cadoux-Hudson TAD. Craniocervical fusion for rheumatoid arthritis: comparison of sublaminar wires and the lateral mass screw craniocervical fusion. Br J Neurosurg. 2002;16:483–486
  54. Lall R, Patel NJ, Resnick DK. A review of complications associated with craniocervical fusion surgery. Neurosurgery J. 2010;67(5):1396–1403
  55. An HS, Gordin R, Renner K. Anatomic considerations for plate-screw fixation of the cervical spine. Spine. 1991;10:S548–S551
  56. Ahmed R, Traynelis VC, Menezes AH. Fusions at the craniovertebral junction. Childs Nerv Syst. 2008;24(10):1209–1224
  57. Jonsson J, Rausching W. Anatomical and morphometric studies in posterior cervical spinal screw-plate systems. J Spinal Disord. 1994;5:429–438

PII: S2090-5068(11)00049-2

doi:10.1016/j.ajme.2011.07.007

Alexandria Journal of Medicine
Volume 47, Issue 3 , Pages 185-192, September 2011

Article Tools

* Image Usage & Resolution