Radiological changes in sagittal parameters after C1-C2 arthrodesis and their clinical correlation: is there a difference between traumatic and non-traumatic causes?

Abstract

Background

Compensatory changes in cervical sagittal alignment after C1-C2 arthrodesis have been reported in a few studies. No studies have explored the differences in these compensatory changes between traumatic and non-traumatic pathologies. Conflicting reports exist on the correlation between cervical sagittal parameters and neck pain or function.

Methodology

Medical records of 81 consecutive patients [Jan 2010–Dec 2018] who underwent Harms arthrodesis were retrospectively reviewed. 53 patients were included in the final analysis. Radiological parameters [C0-C1, C1-C2, C2-C7 angles and T1 slope] and clinical parameters [VAS (Visual analogue scale) and NDI (Neck disability index)] were compared between the two groups, Group A (traumatic) and Group B (non-traumatic).

Results

The 53 patients [Group A (n = 24,) and Group B (n = 29)] had a mean age of 49.98 ± 21.82 years (42 males, 11 females). Mean follow up duration was 48.9 months. Δ C1-C2 angle is significantly correlated with ΔC2-C7 angle (Group A, p = 0.004; Group B, p = 0.015) but not with ΔC0-C1 angle (Group A, p = 0.315; Group B, p = 0.938). Though significant improvement in the clinical parameters (VAS/NDI) has been noted in both groups, Group A showed a greater improvement in VAS scores [Group A, (p < 0.001); Group B, (p < 0.023)].

Conclusions

The sub-axial sagittal profile was strongly correlated with the ΔC1-C2 angle in both groups. Group B showed greater changes in sagittal parameters after Harms fixation and Group A showed greater improvement in long-term functional outcomes. The final functional outcomes were not related to the initial or final radiological sagittal profile in both groups.

Keywords:

• Atlanto-axial
• C1-C2
• instability
• radiological parameters
• sagittal parameters
• trauma

Disclosure statement

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

The place of study accepts retrospective clinical record evaluation without ethical approval

Additional information

Funding

This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors