Transoral Approach for Odontoidectomy Efficacy and Safety
Odontoid process pathologies can cause upper motor neuron lesions. These pathologies can be approached through either a high retropharyngeal approach or a transoral approach. The introduction of the surgical microscope, proper instrumentations, and proper antibiotics has increased utilization of the transoral approach.
Our approach to anterior odontoid resection through transoral approach for different pathologies resulting in compression the cervical cord or causing craniocervical instability is described here. We aim to explore the safety and efficacy of this approach.
Twenty cases of different odontoid pathologies were managed by transoral surgery. Patients were assessed clinically for axial neck pain and radicular symptoms using visual analog scale. The Nurick score was used to get an overall functional evaluation of the difficulty of ambulation and walking. Radiological evaluation of the patients included plain radiographs, CT scans, and MRI of the cervical spine. Posterior surgery was done as a first stage for restoring the sagittal profile of the cervical spine. Transoral surgery was done as a second stage for odontoid resection and anterior decompression of the cord.
Average follow-up was 29.4 ± 3.8 months. Mean preoperative Nurick scale was 1.3 ± 1.2. Mean postoperative Nurcik scale was 0.5 ± 0.61. Patients with axial neck pain were improved after surgery except the 6 patients; mean VAS preoperative 8.2 ± 2.3 SD, mean postoperative VAS 3.7 ± 0.8SD, and radicular symptoms were not significantly changed after surgery; gait changes were improved in all patients with preoperative gait disturbance.
The transoral approach is a safe and effective surgical method for the direct decompression of ventral midline extradural compressive disease of the craniovertebral junction.
Keywordscraniocervical instability odontoidectomy transoral approach
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of Interest
Ahmed Mohamed Elbadrawi, MD, and Tameem Mohamed Elkhateeb, MD, have declared that they have no conflict of interest.
All procedures followed were in accordance with the ethical standards of the responsible committee on human experimentation (institutional and national) and with the Helsinki Declaration of 1975, as revised in 2008 (5).
Informed consent was obtained from all patients for being included in the study.
Required Author Forms
Disclosure forms provided by the authors are available with the online version of this article.
- 4.Crockard HA.The transoral approach to the base of the brain and upper cervical cord. Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 1985; 67(5):321-5.Google Scholar
- 7.Crockard HA, Calder I, Ransford AO. One-stage transoral decompression and posterior fixation in rheumatoid atlanto-axial subluxation. J Bone Joint Surg (Br). 1990; 72: 682-685.Google Scholar
- 9.Crockard HA, Johnston F. Development of transoral approaches to lesions of the skull base and craniocervical junction. Neurosurg Q. 1993; 3: 61-82.Google Scholar
- 11.Dickman CA, Apostolides PJ, Marciano FF: Transoral approach to the craniovertebral junction, in Zdeblick T (ed): Anterior Approaches to the Spine. St. Louis, Quality Medical Publishing. 2016; (in press).Google Scholar
- 12.Dickman CA, Spetzler RF, Sonntag VKH, et al. Transoral approach to the craniovertebral junction. In: Dickman CA, Spetzler RF, Sonntag VKH, eds. Surgery of the craniovertebral junction. New York: Thieme; 1998.Google Scholar
- 13.Bouramas D, Crockard A. Surgical techniques for the spine. Haher TR, Merola AA (Hrsg.), Surgical Techniques for the Spine (ISBN 3131247614) © 2003 Georg Thieme Verlag.Google Scholar
- 16.Gladi M, Iacoangeli M, Specchia N, et al. Endoscopic transnasal odontoid resection to decompress the bulbo-medullary junction: a reliable anterior minimally invasive technique without posterior fusion. Eur Spine J. 2012; 21(Suppl 1): S55-S60. doi: 10.1007/s00586-012-2220-4.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 19.James D, Crockard HA. Surgical access to the base of skull and upper cervical spine by extended maxillotomy. Neurosurgery. 1991; 29(3):411–6.Google Scholar
- 20.Kanavel AB. Bullet locked between atlas and the base of the skull: technique for removal through the mouth. Surg Clin. 1919; 1: 361-366.Google Scholar
- 21.Denaro L, D’Avella D, Longo UG, Denaro V. (Eds) Complications Related to Anterior Approaches. In Denaro L, D’Avella D, Denaro V. (Eds.) Pitfalls in Cervical Spine Surgery Avoidance and Management of Complications © Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2010. pp. 81–91.Google Scholar
- 22.Masferrer R, Hadley MN, Bloomfield S, Spetzler RF, Sonntag VKH. Transoral microsurgical resection of the odontoid process. BNI Quarterly. 1(3):34–40, 1985.Google Scholar
- 23.Menezes AH. Transoral approaches to the clivus and upper cervical spine. In: Menezes AH, Sonntag VKH, eds. Principles of spinal surgery. New York: McGraw-Hill; 1996.Google Scholar
- 24.Menezes AH. Tumors of the craniocervical junction. In: Menezes AH, Sonntag VKH, eds. Principles of spinal surgery. New York: McGraw Hill; 1996.Google Scholar
- 31.Perrini P, Benedetto N, Guidi E, Di Lorenzo N. Transoral approach and its superior extensions to the craniovertebral junction malformations: surgical strategies and results. Neurosurgery. 2009; 64(5 Suppl 2):331–42. doi: 10.1227/01.NEU.0000334430.25626.DC.
- 35.Spetzler RF, Hadley MN, Sonntag VK. The transoral approach to the anterior superior cervical spine. A review of 29 cases. Acta Neurochir. 1988; 43: 69-74. PMID: 3213660.Google Scholar