1 / 18

Occipital Condyle Fractures: Epidemiology, Classification, and Treatment

Occipital Condyle Fractures: Epidemiology, Classification, and Treatment. Sabih T Effendi, Kevin C Morrill, Howard Morgan, David P Chason , Richard A Suss , Christopher J Madden Department of Neurosurgery University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center Dallas , TX. Disclosure Statement.

leverett
Télécharger la présentation

Occipital Condyle Fractures: Epidemiology, Classification, and Treatment

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Occipital Condyle Fractures: Epidemiology, Classification, and Treatment Sabih T Effendi, Kevin C Morrill, Howard Morgan, David P Chason, Richard A Suss, Christopher J Madden Department of Neurosurgery University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center Dallas, TX

  2. Disclosure Statement • Nothing to disclose

  3. History • Sir Charles Bell (1817) • Rare entity • Increasingly diagnosed • Imaging enhancements • Routine imaging Middlesex Hospital Journal 4:469-470, 1817

  4. REVIEW OF LITERATURE

  5. Classification Systems • Anderson and Montesano (1988) • Mechanism of injury → fracture morphology • Type I = comminuted –Type II = basilar skull fx • Type III = avulsed Spine 13: 731-736, 1988

  6. Classification Systems • Tuli et al (1997) • Type 1 = non-displaced • Type 2 = displaced (2A – stable, 2B – unstable) • Instability • CT/Xray – subluxation OR MRI – avulsed transverse ligament • Newer systems • A-M system • Stability assessment • Hanson et al (2001) – bilateral O-C1-C2 joint complex injury • Malham et al (2009) – displaced fracture or malalignment of joint Neurosurgery 41:368-377, 1997 American Roent Ray Soc 178: 1261-68, 2002 Emergency Radiology Online, 2009

  7. Treatment • Experience or non-radiographic outcome: • wide range of treatments suggested • Radiographic outcome data: • Capuano et al (2004) • 10 pts, CT for fusion • All isolated OCF healed well with cervical collar • Malham et al (2009) • 24 pts, CT for fusion and alignment & pain and disability scales • Isolated type I and II heal well with C collar • Isolated type III may benefit from halo vs collar Acta Neurochirurgica 146: 779-784, 2004 Emergency Radiology Online, 2009

  8. Design • Retrospective Review • Parkland Memorial Hospital (Dallas, TX) • 4 year period • Information obtained • Clinical data from medical charts • Initial C-spine CT • f/u flexion extension films

  9. Methods - Classification • Type I vs Type III • Modified Anderson-Montesano system • Type I, II, III • Type I or III – Type I and III (inability to differentiate) (evidence of both)

  10. Methods - Instability • Radiographic Instability Risk Factors Methods - Outcome • Neurological Exam • Lateral Flexion-Extension radiographs

  11. EPIDEMIOLOGY • 89 OCF in 79 patients • 13% bilateral • Gender: 63% M, 37% F • Age: 14-64, mean 30, SD 11 • Mechanism of Injury: • High energy trauma • Associated Fractures: • 47% with spinal fractures

  12. CLASSIFICATION INSTABILITY • Type I and II • All radiographically stable • Type III, IandIII, IorIII • 27% with instability risk • 73% radiographically stable

  13. TREATMENT • 7 patients died • Remaining 72 patients: • Hard cervical collar, CTO, Halo-vest • 4 to 12 weeks • None required surgery TREATMENT & OUTCOME • 50 (69%) at initial follow-up • No new neurological deficits • 21 (29%) with flexion-extension films

  14. TREATMENT & OUTCOME • Type I and II

  15. TREATMENT & OUTCOME • Type III, IorIII, IandIII

  16. CONCLUSIONS • High energy trauma, associated fractures • Modified A-M Classification System • Majority are type III • Stability • Type I and II appear stable • Type III concerning for instability • Treatment • None required surgery • Type I and II • Hard cervical collar • Type III • Stable – hard cervical collar • Unstable - halo

  17. LIMITATIONS • Limited number with complete outcome data • Others FUTURE INVESTIGATION • Assessing stability in type III fracture • Do all type I and II need collar immobilization? • Can some “unstable” type III be treated with collars?

  18. Thank You • Dr. Christopher Madden • Dept of Neurosurgery at UT Southwestern

More Related