Background:Patients with “sandwich” fusion (concomitant C1 occipitalization and C2-C3 nonsegmentation), a subtype of Klippel-Feil syndrome, are at particular risk for developing atlantoaxial dislocation (AAD). However, the clinical and surgical characteristics of AAD in patients with sandwich fusion have not been clearly defined.Methods:A retrospective case-control study with a large sample size and a minimum 2-year follow-up was performed. From 2000 to 2018, 253 patients with sandwich AAD underwent a surgical procedure; these patients constituted the case group, and a matching number of patients with non-sandwich AAD were randomly selected to form the control group. Clinical data from electronic medical records and various imaging studies were analyzed and compared. The Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) scale was used to evaluate neurological function.Results:Patients with sandwich AAD, compared with patients with non-sandwich AAD, had symptom onset at a younger age (34.8 compared with 42.8 years; p < 0.001) and had a higher likelihood for myelopathy (87.4% compared with 74.7%; p < 0.001). Patients with sandwich AAD had a higher incidence of lower cranial nerve palsy (7.9% compared with 0.0%; p < 0.001), a lower preoperative JOA score (13.4 compared with 14.2; p < 0.001), and higher incidences of accompanying Type-I Chiari malformation (20.9% compared with 1.2%; p < 0.001) and syringomyelia (21.3% compared with 1.6%; p < 0.001). Finally, patients with sandwich AAD had higher likelihoods of undergoing transoral release (28.5% compared with 5.1%; p < 0.001) and use of salvage fixation techniques (34.4% compared with 6.3%; p < 0.001), and had lower postoperative results for the JOA score (14.9 compared with 15.9; p < 0.001) and improvement rate (43.8% compared with 58.2%; p < 0.001).Conclusions:Patients with sandwich AAD demonstrated distinct clinical manifestations. Versatility involving the use of various internal fixation techniques and transoral release procedures was frequently required in the surgical management of these patients, and meticulous and personalized preoperative planning would be of paramount importance.Level of Evidence:Prognostic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
Study design Finite element analysis (FEA). Objective This study aimed to explore the effects of cage elastic modulus (Cage-E) on the endplate stress in different bone conditions: osteoporosis (OP) and non-osteoporosis (non-OP). We also explored the correlation between endplate thickness and endplate stress. Method The FEA models of L4-L5 with lumbar interbody fusion were designed to access the effects of Cage-E on the endplate stress in different bone conditions. Two groups of the Young’s moduli of bony structure were assigned to simulate the conditions of OP and non-OP, and the bony endplates were analyzed in 2 kinds of thicknesses: .5 mm and 1.0 mm, with the insertion of cages with different Young’s moduli including .5, 1.5, 3, 5, 10, and 20 GPa. After model validation, an axial compressive load of 400 N and a flexion/extension moment of 7.5Nm was performed on the superior surface of L4 vertebral body in order to analyze the distribution of stress. Result The maximum Von Mises stress in the endplates increased by up to 100% in the OP model compared with non-OP model under the same condition of cage-E and endplate thickness. In both OP and non-OP models, the maximum endplate stress decreased as the cage-E decreased, but the maximum stress in the lumbar posterior fixation increased as the cage-E decreased. Thinner endplate thickness was associated with increased endplate stress. Conclusion The endplate stress is higher in osteoporotic bone than non-osteoporotic bone, which explains part of the mechanism of OP-related cage subsidence. It is reasonable to reduce the endplate stress by reducing the cage-E, but we should balance the risk of fixation failure. Endplate thickness is also important when evaluating the cage subsidence risk.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.