Callaway Josh, Shahzad Hania, Tse Shannon, Frei Ashley, Javidan Yashar, Roberto Rolando, Le Hai
From the Department of Orthopedic Surgery, University of California, Davis Sacramento CA.
J Am Acad Orthop Surg Glob Res Rev. 2025 May 8;9(5). doi: 10.5435/JAAOSGlobal-D-25-00083. eCollection 2025 May 1.
Facet fracture dislocations of the subaxial spine pose notable risks of neurologic injury and spinal instability. The optimal surgical approach-whether anterior-alone, posterior-alone, or combined anterior-posterior-remains debated. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness, safety, and long-term outcomes of these surgical approaches.
A retrospective analysis of patients presenting with cervical facet fractures at a single level I trauma center was conducted. They were divided into anterior-alone, posterior-alone, and combined AP surgical groups. Primary outcomes including preoperative neurologic status (American Spinal Injury Association [ASIA] classification), intensive care unit stay, long-term neurologic recovery, and revision surgery rates were compared between patients undergoing each of these approaches.
A total of 33 patients were included in the analysis. Bilateral dislocations were more common in the posterior group (87.5%) compared with the anterior group (50%). Anterior surgery was performed more frequently for C4-5 and C5-6 dislocations (57.1%). Patients with ASIA E were more likely to undergo anterior surgery while those with ASIA A-D tended to have combined or posterior approaches. The average intensive care unit stay was 8.9 days (median 3), 6.6 days (median 4), and 6.3 days (median 4) for anterior, posterior, and combined groups, respectively. Long-term neurologic recovery was observed in 28.6% of anterior patients, 12.5% of posterior patients, and 36.4% of combined patients. The anterior group had a higher revision surgery rate (14.3%; P = 0.284). Patients in the anterior group were most likely to be discharged home with minimal care requirements.
Anterior surgery is a particularly viable option for C4-5 and C5-6 dislocations in patients with minimal neurologic impairment. Combined AP surgery is more beneficial for bilateral C4-5 and C5-6 dislocations when severe neurologic deficits or other complex injuries necessitate greater stabilization. Posterior approaches may be preferable for complex bilateral dislocations, particularly at C6-7 and C7-T1, where anterior visualization is limited.
下颈椎小关节骨折脱位存在显著的神经损伤和脊柱不稳定风险。最佳手术入路——无论是单纯前路、单纯后路还是前后联合入路——仍存在争议。本研究的目的是评估这些手术入路的有效性、安全性和长期疗效。
对一家一级创伤中心收治的颈椎单节段小关节骨折患者进行回顾性分析。他们被分为单纯前路、单纯后路和前后联合手术组。比较了接受每种手术入路的患者的主要结局,包括术前神经状态(美国脊髓损伤协会[ASIA]分级)、重症监护病房住院时间、长期神经恢复情况和翻修手术率。
共有33例患者纳入分析。与前路组(50%)相比,后路组双侧脱位更为常见(87.5%)。C4-5和C5-6脱位更常采用前路手术(57.1%)。ASIA E级患者更倾向于接受前路手术,而ASIA A-D级患者倾向于采用联合或后路入路。前路、后路和联合组的平均重症监护病房住院时间分别为8.9天(中位数3天)、6.6天(中位数4天)和6.3天(中位数4天)。前路组患者长期神经恢复率为28.6%,后路组为12.5%,联合组为36.4%。前路组翻修手术率更高(14.3%;P = 0.284)。前路组患者最有可能在护理需求最少的情况下出院回家。
对于神经损伤轻微的患者,C4-5和C5-6脱位,前路手术是一种特别可行的选择。当严重神经功能缺损或其他复杂损伤需要更强的稳定性时,前后联合手术对双侧C4-5和C5-6脱位更有益。后路入路可能更适合复杂的双侧脱位,特别是在C6-7和C7-T1,前路视野受限的部位。