Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Relevance of the cranioaxial angle in the occipitocervical stabilization using an original construct: a retrospective study on 50 patients

  • Original Article
  • Published:
European Spine Journal Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

We present a retrospective study on a series composed of 50 patients, treated between 1992 and 2006, affected by pathologies of the craniocervical junction. All the patients were treated using an innovative procedure based on a cranial claw made up of low profile hooks, conceived by one of the authors. Advantages of this technique are, to our point of view, a higher resistance to cranial hooks dislodgment, when compared with screw fixation instrumentation, especially in pathological conditions, such as rheumatoid arthritis that leads to a qualitative deterioration of the bone stock and to the reduction of the occipital wall thickness. Occipitoaxial alignment was assessed radiographically using the McGregor line. We observed an improvement in the subjective evaluation of pain in all treated patients with a 46% improvement from the initial values. Moreover, patient stabilized with an occipitoaxial angle included in the physiological range showed better results either for the survival of the instrumentation or the onset of junctional pathology. Patients have been followed up afterwards and evaluated by the visual analogue scale for the assessment of pain and by the Nurick scale for the cases associated with myelopathy. We believe that cranial anchorage with a hook claw allows for an instrumentation provided with high stability, particularly useful in revision surgery and major instabilities. The study of the occipitoaxial angles showed that the better results and the long-lasting stability of the implant are correlated to a fusion angle included in the physiological range.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Davey JR, Rorabeck CH, Bailey SI, Bourne RB, Dewar FP (1985) A technique of posterior cervical fusion for instability of the cervical spine. Spine 10:722–728

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Ellis PM, Findlay JM (1994) Craniocervical fusion with contoured Luque rod and autogenic bone graft. Can J Surg 37:50–54

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Förster O (1927) Die Leitungsbahnen des Schmerzgefühls und die chirurgische Behandlung der Schmerzzustände. Urban and Schwarzenburg, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  4. Grob D, Dvorak J, Panjabi M, Froehlich M, Hayek J (1991) Posterior occipitocervical fusion: a preliminary report of a new technique. Spine 16(3):17–24

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Kraus DR, Peppelman WC, Agarwal AK, DeLeeuw HW, Donaldson WF 3rd (1991) Incidence of subaxial subluxation in patients with generalized rheumatoid arthritis who had previous occipital cervical fusion. Spine 16:486–489

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Logroscino CA, Casula S, Rigante M, Almadori G (2004) Transmandible approach for the treatment of upper cervical spine metastatic tumors. Orthopaedics 10:1100–1103

    Google Scholar 

  7. Logroscino CA, Diop A, Lavaste F (1996) Development of a new short metal construct for the treatment of severe craniocervical instability: biomechanical evaluation. Spine State Art Rev 10(2):315–325

    Google Scholar 

  8. Matsunaga S, Ijiri K, Koga H (2000) Results of a longer than 10-year follow-up of patients with rheumatoid arthritis treated by occipitocervical fusion. Spine 25:1749–1753

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Matsunaga S, Onischi T, Sakou T (2001) Significance of occipitoaxial angle in subaxial lesion after occipitocervical fusion. Spine 26:161–165

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. McRae LD, Barnum SA (1953) Occipitalization of the atlas. AJR Am J Roentgenol 70:23–45

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Nurick S (1972) The pathogenesis of the spinal cord disorder associated with cervical spondylosis. Brain 95:87–100

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Oda T, Fujiwara K, Yonenobu K, Azuma B (1995) Natural course of cervical spine lesions in rheumatoid arthritis. Spine 20:1128–1135

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Philips MF, Phillips SC, Wetzel TF, Gelinas C (1999) Occipitocervical neutral position: possible surgical implications. Spine 24:775–778

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Shoda N, Takeshita K, Seichi A, Akune T, Nakajima S, Anamizu Y, Miyashita M, Nakamura K (2004) Measurement of occipitocervical angle. Spine 29:204–208

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Steinbrocker O, Träger CH, Batterman RC (1949) Therapeutic criteria in rheumatoid arthritis. J Am Med Assoc 140:659–662

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of interest statement

None of the authors has any potential conflict of interest.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to C. A. Logroscino.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Logroscino, C.A., Genitiempo, M. & Casula, S. Relevance of the cranioaxial angle in the occipitocervical stabilization using an original construct: a retrospective study on 50 patients. Eur Spine J 18 (Suppl 1), 7–12 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-009-0985-x

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-009-0985-x

Keywords

Navigation