Botros Mina, Singh Aman, Shaikh Hashim, Ramirez Gabriel, Molinari Robert W, Puvanesarajah Varun
Department of Orthopaedics & Physical Performance, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, NY, USA.
University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry, Rochester, NY, USA.
Global Spine J. 2025 Jan;15(1):175-183. doi: 10.1177/21925682241284559. Epub 2024 Sep 12.
Retrospective cohort study.
Atypical hangman's fractures are associated with increased risk for neurologic injury due to involvement of the posterior cortex of the axis body. We present the largest single-center cohort of atypical hangman's fractures with the goal of guiding treatment decisions and outcomes based on fracture classification.
We performed a retrospective analysis of all patients with atypical hangman's fractures treated at a single Level I trauma center between January 2010 and September 2023. 51 patients met inclusion criteria and demographic, treatment, and radiographic data were recorded and compared across the Type I and II fracture groups.
Final treatment modalities varied significantly between the groups ( < 0.01), with hard cervical collar and invasive halo immobilization being the most prevalent treatments for fracture Types I and II respectively. One Type I fracture patient and four Type II fracture patients failed non-operative treatment, requiring surgery. Across both groups, posterior cervical fusion (73%) was the most common surgical approach. Median length of stay varied significantly between the two fracture groups (2.0 (1.0-7.0) vs 5.0 (3.0-8.0) days; = 0.01). Irrespective of fracture type, longer hospital length of stay was associated with increased patient age (IRR = 1.02; < 0.01), non-white race (IRR = 2.47; = 0.01), injury caused by MVC (IRR = 1.93; < 0.01), and the presence of non-spine orthopedic injuries (IRR = 1.72; = 0.03).
While atypical Type I hangman's fractures may be managed effectively non-operatively with a hard cervical collar, atypical Type II fractures managed with a hard cervical collar are at greater risk of requiring subsequent surgical intervention.
回顾性队列研究。
由于枢椎体后皮质受累,非典型绞刑者骨折与神经损伤风险增加相关。我们展示了最大的单中心非典型绞刑者骨折队列,目的是基于骨折分类指导治疗决策和评估预后。
我们对2010年1月至2023年9月期间在一家一级创伤中心接受治疗的所有非典型绞刑者骨折患者进行了回顾性分析。51例患者符合纳入标准,记录了人口统计学、治疗和影像学数据,并在I型和II型骨折组之间进行了比较。
两组之间的最终治疗方式差异显著(<0.01),硬颈托和侵入性头环固定分别是I型和II型骨折最常见的治疗方法。1例I型骨折患者和4例II型骨折患者非手术治疗失败,需要手术。在两组中,颈椎后路融合术(73%)是最常见的手术方式。两个骨折组的中位住院时间差异显著(2.0(1.0 - 7.0)天 vs 5.0(3.0 - 8.0)天; = 0.01)。无论骨折类型如何,住院时间延长与患者年龄增加(IRR = 1.02; < 0.01)、非白人种族(IRR = 2.47; = 0.01)、机动车碰撞导致的损伤(IRR = 1.93; < 0.01)以及存在非脊柱骨科损伤(IRR = 1.72; = 0.03)有关。
虽然非典型I型绞刑者骨折可以通过硬颈托有效地进行非手术治疗,但采用硬颈托治疗的非典型II型骨折需要后续手术干预的风险更大。