Format

Send to

Choose Destination
Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. 2014 Apr;100(2):221-7. doi: 10.1016/j.otsr.2013.09.019.

C1-C2 stabilization by Harms arthrodesis: indications, technique, complications and outcomes in a prospective 26-case series.

Author information

1
Service de Neurochirurgie C et Chirurgie du Rachis, Hôpital Pierre-Wertheimer, GHE, Hospices Civils de Lyon, Université Claude-Bernard Lyon 1, 59, boulevard Pinel, 69500 Bron, France.
2
Service de Neurochirurgie C et Chirurgie du Rachis, Hôpital Pierre-Wertheimer, GHE, Hospices Civils de Lyon, Université Claude-Bernard Lyon 1, 59, boulevard Pinel, 69500 Bron, France. Electronic address: cedric.barrey@chu-lyon.fr.
3
Service de Neurochirurgie C et Chirurgie du Rachis, Hôpital Pierre-Wertheimer, GHE, Hospices Civils de Lyon, Université Claude-Bernard Lyon 1, 59, boulevard Pinel, 69500 Bron, France; Laboratoire de Biomécanique, Art et Métiers Paristech, ESNAM, 151, boulevard de l'Hôpital, 75013 Paris, France.

Abstract

INTRODUCTION:

C1-C2 arthrodesis is a surgical challenge due to the proximity of neurovascular structures (vertebral arteries and spinal cord) and the wide range of motion of the joint, hampering bone fusion. A variety of techniques have been successively recommended to reduce anatomic risk and improve results in terms of biomechanical stability and fusion rates. Recently, Harms described a new technique using polyaxial screws in the C1 lateral masses and C2 pedicles.

MATERIAL AND METHOD:

The present study reports our experience in a consecutive series of 26 patients operated on by C1-C2 arthrodesis using the Goel and Harms technique, and details technical aspects step by step. Routine systematic immediate postoperative CT and 6-month CT controlled screw positioning and assessed fusion. Follow-up was at least 1 year, except in 2 cases (10 months).

RESULTS:

Twenty-six patients with a mean age of 57 years were included. Indications comprised: C2 non-union (n=11), C1-C2 fracture and/or dislocation (n=11), inflammatory pathology (n=2) and tumoral pathology (n=2). The results showed the technique to be reliable (no neurovascular complications and 85% of screws with perfect positioning) and an excellent rate of fusion (100% at 6 months).

CONCLUSION:

Anatomic and biomechanical considerations, combined with the present clinical and radiological outcomes, indicate that Goel and Harms fusion is to be considered the first-line attitude of choice for posterior C1-C2 arthrodesis.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE:

Level IV prospective study.

KEYWORDS:

C1-C2 fusion; C1-C2 instability; C1-C2 screws; Cervical fusion; Cervical spine arthrodesis; Harms

PMID:
24629457
DOI:
10.1016/j.otsr.2013.09.019
[Indexed for MEDLINE]
Free full text

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Elsevier Science
Loading ...
Support Center