Patient-rated outcome after atlantoaxial (C1-C2) fusion: more than a decade of evaluation of 2-year outcomes in 126 patients
- PMID: 34477947
- DOI: 10.1007/s00586-021-06959-1
Patient-rated outcome after atlantoaxial (C1-C2) fusion: more than a decade of evaluation of 2-year outcomes in 126 patients
Abstract
Introduction: Various surgical techniques have been introduced for atlantoaxial (C1-C2) fusion, the most common being Magerl's (transarticular) or the Harms/Goel screw fixation. Common indications include degenerative osteoarthritis (OA), trauma or rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Only few, small studies have evaluated patient-reported outcomes after C1-C2 fusion. We investigated 2-year outcomes in a large series of consecutive patients undergoing isolated C1-C2 fusion.
Methods: We analysed prospectively collected data (2005-2016) from our Spine outcomes database, collected within the framework of EUROSPINE's Spine Tango Registry. It included 126 patients (34 (27%) men, 92 (73%) women; mean (SD) age 67 ± 19 y) who had undergone first-time isolated C1-C2 fusion (61% Magerl, 39% Harms(-Goel)) at least 2 years ago for OA (83 (66%)), RA (20 (16%)), fracture (15 (12%)) or other (8 (6%)). Patients completed the multidimensional Core Outcome Measures Index (COMI; 0-10) and various single item outcomes.
Results: Questionnaires were returned by 118/126 (94%) patients, 2 years post-operative. Mean COMI scores showed a significant reduction from baseline: 6.9 ± 2.4 to 2.7 ± 2.5 (p < 0.0001). Overall, 75% patients achieved the MCIC of ≥ 2.2 points reduction in COMI and 88% reported a good global outcome. 91% patients were satisfied/very satisfied with their care. Self-reported complications were declared by 16% patients and further surgery at the same segment, by 2.5%.
Conclusion: In this large series with almost complete follow-up, C1-C2 fusion showed extremely good results. Despite the complexity of the intervention, outcomes surpassed those typically reported for simple procedures such as ACDF and lumbar discectomy, suggesting reservations about the procedure should perhaps be reviewed.
Keywords: Atlantoaxial fusion; Cervical spine C1-2 fusion; Osteoarthritis; Patient-reported outcome; Rheumatoid arthritis.
© 2021. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.
References
-
- Star MJ, Curd JG, Thorne RP (1992) Atlantoaxial lateral mass osteoarthritis. A frequently overlooked cause of severe occipitocervical pain. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 17:S71-76 - DOI
-
- Halla JT, Hardin JG Jr (1987) Atlantoaxial (C1–C2) facet joint osteoarthritis: a distinctive clinical syndrome. Arthritis Rheum 30:577–582 - DOI
-
- Betsch MW, Blizzard SR, Shinseki MS, Yoo JU (2015) Prevalence of degenerative changes of the atlanto-axial joints. Spine J 15:275–280. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spinee.2014.09.011 - DOI - PubMed
-
- Yu H, Hou S, Wu W, He X (2011) Upper cervical manipulation combined with mobilization for the treatment of atlantoaxial osteoarthritis: a report of 10 cases. J Manipulative Physiol Ther 34:131–137. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmpt.2010.12.005 - DOI - PubMed
-
- Buraimoh MA, Massie LW, Montgomery DM (2017) Lateral atlantoaxial osteoarthritis: a narrative literature review. Clin Spine Surg 30:433–438. https://doi.org/10.1097/BSD.0000000000000592 - DOI - PubMed
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Miscellaneous