Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

New C2 synchondrosal fracture classification system

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Pediatric Radiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

An Erratum to this article was published on 03 July 2015

Abstract

Background

Excessive cervical flexion-extension accompanying mild to severe impact injuries can lead to C2 synchondrosal fractures in young children.

Objective

To characterize and classify C2 synchondrosal fracture patterns.

Materials and methods

We retrospectively reviewed imaging and medical records of children who were treated for cervical spine fractures at our institution between 1995 and 2014. We reviewed all fractures involving the five central C2 synchondroses with regard to patient demographics, mechanism of injury, fracture pattern, associated fractures and other injuries, treatment plans and outcome.

Results

Fourteen children had fractures involving the central C2 synchondroses. There were nine boys and five girls, all younger than 6 years. We found four distinct fracture patterns. Eleven complete fractures were further divided into four subtypes (a, b, c and d) based on degree of anterior displacement of the odontoid segment and presence of distraction. Nine of these 11 children had fractures through both odontoneural synchondroses and the odontocentral synchondrosis; one had fractures involving both neurocentral synchondroses and the odontoneural synchondrosis; one had fractures through bilateral odontoneural and bilateral neurocentral synchondroses. Three children had incomplete fractures, defined as a fracture through a single odontoneural synchondrosis with or without partial extension into either the odontocentral or the adjacent neurocentral synchondroses. All complete fractures were displaced or angulated. Four had associated spinal cord injury, including two contusions (subtype c fractures) and two fatal transections (subtype d fractures). Most children were treated with primary halo stabilization. Subtype c fractures required surgical fixation.

Conclusion

We describe four patterns of central C2 synchondrosal fractures, including two unique patterns that have not been reported. We propose a classification system to distinguish these fractures and aid in treatment planning.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Lustrin ES, Karakas SP, Ortiz AO et al (2003) Pediatric cervical spine: normal anatomy, variants and trauma. Radiographics 23:539–560

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Blauth M, Schmidt U, Otte D et al (1996) Fractures of the odontoid process in small children: biomechanical analysis and report of three cases. Eur Spine J 5:63–70

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Fassett DR, McCall T, Brockmeyer DL (2006) Odontoid synchondrosis fractures in children. Neurosurg Focus 20:E7

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Hosalkar HS, Greenbaum JN, Flynn JM et al (2009) Fractures of the odontoid in children with an open basilar synchondrosis. J Bone Joint Surg Br 91:789–796

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Karwacki GM, Schneider JF (2012) Normal ossification patterns of atlas and axis: a CT study. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 33:1882–1887

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Gore PA, Chang S, Theodore N (2009) Cervical spine injuries in children: attention to radiographic differences and stability compared to those in the adult patient. Semin Pediatr Neurol 16:42–58

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Ogden JA (1984) Radiology of postnatal skeletal development. Skeletal Radiol 12:169–177

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Anderson LD, D’Alonzo RT (1974) Fractures of the odontoid process of the axis. J Bone Joint Surg Am 56:1663–1674

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Connolly B, Emery D, Armstrong D (1995) The odontoid synchondrotic slip: an injury unique to young children. Pediatr Radiol 25:S129–S133

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Vining DJ, Benzel EC, Orrison W (1992) Childhood odontoid fractures evaluated with computerized tomography: case report. J Neurosurg 77:795–798

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Sherburn EW, Day RA, Kaufman BA et al (1996) Subdental synchondrosis fracture in children: the value of 3-dimensional computerized tomography. Pediatr Neurosurg 25:256–259

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Weisskopf M, Reindl R, Schroder R et al (2001) CT scans versus conventional tomography in acute fractures of the odontoid process. Eur Spine J 10:250–256

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Sun PP, Poffenbarger GJ, Durham S et al (2000) Spectrum of occipitoatlantoaxial injury in young children. J Neurosurg 93:28–39

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Mandabach M, Ruge JR, Hahn YS et al (1993) Pediatric axis fractures: early halo immobilization, management and outcome. Pediatr Neurosurg 19:225–232

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Odent T, Langlais J, Glorion C et al (1999) Fractures of the odontoid process: a report of 15 cases in children younger than 6 years. J Pediatr Orthop 19:51–54

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Sherk HH, Nicholson JT, Chung SM (1978) Fractures of the odontoid process in young children. J Bone Joint Surg Am 60:921–924

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank Brad Hoehne for assistance with figure illustrations.

Conflicts of interest

None

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Lynne Ruess.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Rusin, J.A., Ruess, L. & Daulton, R.S. New C2 synchondrosal fracture classification system. Pediatr Radiol 45, 872–881 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00247-014-3224-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00247-014-3224-5

Keywords

Navigation