Outcomes of halo immobilization in the management of subaxial cervical facet fractures

Outcomes after application of halothoracic orthosis for cervical spine trauma

BACKGROUND

Cervical spine fractures can be managed operatively or nonoperatively, considering injury type and patient factors. Nonoperative management may include application of a halothoracic orthosis (HTO). The aim of our study was to describe our patients managed with HTO, review their 6-month and 12-month outcomes, and identify associated factors.

METHODS

Patients fitted with an HTO at our institution in 2014 were included. Data collected included patient demographics, hospital-related data, and radiological union. Injury detail and 6-month and 12-month patient-reported outcomes (Glasgow Outcomes Scale Extended and return to work [RTW]) were accessed through Victorian Orthopedic Trauma Outcomes Registry. Factors related to these outcomes were included in a mixed-effect regression model for each outcome.

RESULTS

Eighty-six patients (median age 46.5 years) of whom 52 (60%) were male individuals were included. Two-thirds (57 patients) were road trauma patients, and 58 patients (67%) experienced an isolated injury. Thirty-seven patients (43%) experienced a C2 fracture and 27 (31%) experienced a facet fracture. Twelve-month follow-up was completed for 78 patients (91%) with 27 (35%) reporting a good recovery, and 65% (31/48) patients returned to work. Factors associated with lower odds of RTW included compensation, a facet joint fracture, and experiencing comorbidities. No factors were significantly associated with functional outcome, although female individuals exhibited a slower recovery trajectory than male individuals.

CONCLUSION

Many patients reported poor 12-month outcomes after HTO for traumatic injury. Factors associated with worse outcomes should be considered when deciding on management of patients with cervical spine fractures.

Halo vest immobilization - an institutional review of safety in acute cervical spine injury from 2013 to 2017

Objective: Halo vest immobilization (HVI) remains an important treatment option for occipital-cervical injuries. It provides the surgeon with a safe and effective medical treatment options for challenging patients. The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety of HVI in these patients.Methods: This retrospective study identified adult patients treated with Halo vests immobilization (HVI) for acute cervical spine injury at our metropolitan level 1 trauma center from 2013 to 2017. This heterogenous cohort included 67 consecutive patients with acute cervical spine injury secondary to trauma or iatrogenic injury following surgical intervention with a mean age of 52 and a mean injury severity score (ISS) of 18. Forty-six percent of patients were treated with HVI as an adjunct therapy to surgical fixation (both short- and long-term immobilization), 45% of patients were treated with HVI as a primary medical treatment, and 9% of patients were treated with HVI instead of failed conservative medical treatment, such as cervical braces. Results: Pneumonia during the initial hospital stay was the most common complication (25%), followed by the correction of loose pins (22%) and pin site infections (18%). Overall, 51% of patients experienced at least one of these complications. There were significant associations between low initial GCS scores and the development of pneumonia (p < 0.001), high ISS scores and the development of pneumonia (p < 0.01), and duration of HVI and the occurrence of loose pins (p < 0.05). Four patients initially treated with HVI as primary medical treatment was converted to surgical treatment due to an intolerance of HVI or non-healing injuries.Conclusions:The HVI is a safe and effective treatment modality in a subset of patients with complex cervical junction and subaxial cervical spine pathology.

Accuracy and reliability of the AO Spine subaxial cervical spine classification system grading subaxial cervical facet injury morphology

PURPOSE

A classification system was recently developed by the international association AO Spine for assessing subaxial cervical spine fractures. Significant variability exists between users of the facet component, which consists of four morphological types (F1-F4). The primary aims of this study were to assess the diagnostic accuracy and reliability of this new system's facet injury morphological classifications.

METHODS

A survey consisting of 16 computed tomography (CT) scans of patients with cervical facet fractures was distributed to spine surgeon members of AO Spine Latin America. To provide a gold standard diagnosis for comparison, all 16 injuries had been classified previously by six co-authors and only were included after total consensus was achieved. Demographic and surgical practice characteristics of all respondents were analyzed, and diagnostic accuracy calculated. Inter- and intra-observer agreement rates were calculated across two survey rounds, conducted one month apart.

RESULTS

A total of 135 surgeons completed both surveys, among whom the mean age was 41.6 years (range 26-71), 130 (96.3%) were men, and 83 (61.5%) were orthopedic surgeons. The mean time in practice as a spine surgeon was 9.7 years (1-30). The overall diagnostic accuracy of all responses was 65.4%. Inter-observer and intra-observer agreement rates for F1/F2/F3/F4 were 55.4%/47.6%/64.0%/94.7% and 60.0%/49.1%/58.0%/93.0%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

This study evaluates the AO Spine Classification System specifically for facet injuries involving the subaxial cervical spine in a large sample of spine surgeons. There was significant variability in diagnostic accuracy for F1 through F3-type fractures, whereas almost universal agreement was achieved for F4-type injuries.

Outcomes of Halo Immobilization for Cervical Spine Fractures

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate complications and outcomes of halo immobilization in patients with cervical spine fractures treated at a level I trauma center.

METHODS

A retrospective evaluation of patients treated at a single institution with halo immobilization from August 2000 to February 2016 was performed. Demographic information, mechanism of injury, level and type of spine fracture, length of halo immobilization, complications associated with halo immobilization, and length of patient follow-up were collected.

RESULTS

A total of 189 patients treated with halos were identified. Of the 189 patients, 121 (64%) received halos for the management of cervical spine fractures and were included in the study. A total of 49.6% were males and 50.4% were females. The average age was 50.8 years (range 1-89 years). Overall, 10.7% sustained C1 fractures, 71.1% C2 fractures, and 18.2% subaxial spine (C3-C7) fractures. In all, 47.1% of the upper cervical fractures were either odontoid or hangman-type fractures. A total of 25.1% of patients had multiple cervical fractures. At latest follow-up, 81% had healed fractures with good alignment, minimal pain, and return to normal activities. There was an 8.3% mortality rate. The mortality group had an average age of 64.7 years (range 19-84 years). A total of 10.7% of patients failed halo immobilization and 46.3% of patients had complications such as pin site infections (5.8%), loose pins (1.7%), neck pain (20.7%), decreased range of motion (14%), thoracic skin ulcers (2.4%), and dysphagia (1.7%).

CONCLUSIONS

The use of halo immobilization for cervical spine fractures resulted in clinical success in 81% of patients. Complication rates in geriatric patients were lower than previously reported in the literature.

Clinical Outcomes of Cervical Facet Fractures Treated Nonoperatively With Hard Collar or Halo Immobilization

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective review.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the rate of nonoperative treatment failure for cervical facet fractures while secondarily validating computed tomography-based criteria proposed by Spector et al for identifying risk of failure of nonoperative management.

METHODS

Single-level or multilevel unilateral cervical facet fractures from 2007 to 2014 were included. Exclusion criteria included spondylolisthesis, dislocated or perched facets, bilateral facet fractures at the same level, floating lateral mass, thoracic or lumbar spine injuries, or spinal cord injury. Patients were placed into 3 groups for evaluation: immediate operative management, successful nonoperative management, and failed nonoperative treatment requiring surgical intervention.

RESULTS

Eighty-eight patients (106 facets) were included. Twenty-one patients underwent operative treatment with anterior cervical discectomy and fusion or posterior spinal instrumentation and fusion without any failures. Sixty-seven of these patients were treated nonoperatively with either a hard collar (n = 62) or halo vest (n = 5). Eleven patients failed nonoperative treatment (16.4%), all with an absolute fracture height of at least 1 cm and 40% involvement of the absolute height of the lateral mass. Of the 56 patients successfully treated through nonoperative measures, 8 (14.3%) had fracture measurements exceeding both operative parameters.

CONCLUSION

We conclude that it is safe and appropriate for patients with unilateral cervical facet fractures to receive a trial period of nonoperative management. However, patients who weigh over 100 kg, have comminuted fractures, or have radiographic measurements outside of the proposed computed tomography criteria for nonoperative treatment should be educated on the risks of treatment failure.