Surgical outcomes of intraoperative O-arm versus C-arm fluoroscopy in occipitocervical fixation: a retrospective analysis

Abstract

Purpose

This study aims to compare the effect of using O-arm and C-arm fluoroscopy on the surgical outcomes of occipitocervical fixation.

Methods

The study included patients who underwent occipitocervical fixation using O-arm or C-arm between 2005 and 2021. Of 56 patients, 34 underwent O-arm-assisted surgery (O-group) and 22 underwent C-arm-assisted surgery (C-group). We assessed surgical outcomes, including operative time, intraoperative blood loss, perioperative complications, and bone union.

Results

Almost half of the patients had rheumatoid arthritis-related disorders in both groups. Sixteen cases (47.1%) in the O-group and 12 cases (54.5%) in the C-group were fixed from occipito (Oc) to C3, 12 cases (38.2%) in the O-group and 7 cases (31.8%) in the C-group from Oc to C4-7, 5 cases (14.7%) in the O-group, and 3 cases (13.6%) in the C-group from Oc to T2 (p = 0.929). There was no significant difference in operative time (p = 0.239) and intraoperative blood loss (p = 0.595) between the two groups. Dysphagia was the most common complication in both groups (O-group vs. C-group, 11.7% vs. 9.1%). Regarding implant-related complications, occipital plate dislodgement was observed in four cases (18.2%) in the C-group (p = 0.02). The bone union rate was 96.3% in the O-group and 93.3% in the C-group (P = 1).

Conclusions

O-arm use is associated with a reduced rate of occipital plate dislodgment and has a similar complication incidence compared with C-arm-assisted surgery and does not prolong operative time despite the time needed for setting and scanning. Accordingly, an O-arm is safe and useful for occipitocervical fixation surgery.

Keywords:

• Occipitocervical fixation
• O-arm
• C-arm fluoroscopy
• surgical results
• complications

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).