The platform will undergo maintenance on Sep 14 at about 7:45 AM EST and will be unavailable for approximately 2 hours.
2020
DOI: 10.1007/s10143-020-01366-4
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Management of post-traumatic craniovertebral junction dislocation: A PRISMA-compliant systematic review and meta-analysis of casereports

Abstract: Although historically considered fatal, with the advent of improved pre-hospital care, traumatic dislocation of the craniovertebral junction (CVJ) has been increasing in prevalence in neurosurgical centers. As more survivors are reported each year, a timely review with meta-analysis of their management seems necessary. PRISMA checklist was followed step by step. PubMed and Web of Science databases were searched using words “craniovertebral junction dislocation” and their corresponding synonyms. Study eligibili… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

1
11
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

3
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 12 publications
(12 citation statements)
references
References 66 publications
1
11
0
Order By: Relevance
“…This study evaluated 78 consecutive cases of atlantoaxial instability treated with posterior C1-C2 fixation. The results are in accordance with previously published studies suggesting that non-navigated posterior C1-C2 fixation, with both TAS and SRC, is an effective treatment for cervical instability and pain [2][3][4][5][6]10,11,[17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30][31][32]. Three patients (3.8%) underwent revision to improve construct stability, in 2 cases due to renewed trauma with extended posterior fixation (C0-C4 and C0-Th2) and in 1 case due to fractured TAS combined with neck pain, where the TAS-construct was removed in favor of SRC.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 92%
“…This study evaluated 78 consecutive cases of atlantoaxial instability treated with posterior C1-C2 fixation. The results are in accordance with previously published studies suggesting that non-navigated posterior C1-C2 fixation, with both TAS and SRC, is an effective treatment for cervical instability and pain [2][3][4][5][6]10,11,[17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30][31][32]. Three patients (3.8%) underwent revision to improve construct stability, in 2 cases due to renewed trauma with extended posterior fixation (C0-C4 and C0-Th2) and in 1 case due to fractured TAS combined with neck pain, where the TAS-construct was removed in favor of SRC.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 92%
“…Furthermore, screening is carried out by deleting duplicate journals, journals that do not focus on the topic, journals with qualitative methods, journals in languages other than Indonesian and English, and journals that are only abstract and cannot be accessed. The screening results from 4,018 journals were obtained as many as 77 journals, then assessed the feasibility of the journals with AMSTAR so that as many as 20 journals were selected with high quality (score [9][10][11].…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As it was recently noted, the most commonly employed method of managing both post-traumatic and rheumatic craniovertebral dislocation is Goel-Harms C1 lateral mass-C2 pedicle screw placement [6,7]. This procedure has become a gold standard thanks to polyaxial screws that provide a solid bicortical purchase.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%