ArticleBrain & spine2025
Treatment practices for geriatric type II odontoid fractures - A survey by the European Association of Neurosurgical Societies Spine Section.
Article in Brain & spine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Controversy exists regarding the optimal management of type II odontoid fractures in the geriatric population. The objective of this study was to determine the current treatment patterns of spine surgeons for geriatric patients (≥70 years) with type II odontoid fractures. Research question: How much do treatment practices for type II odontoid fractures in the geriatric population differ amongst spine surgeons? Methods: The European Association of Neurosurgical Societies (EANS) Spine Section distributed a 39-items web-based survey among spine surgeons between July 2024 and February 2025. Results: A total of 154 responses were collected from 119 neurosurgeons (77.8 %) and 34 orthopedic surgeons (22.2 %). Participants were predominantly from Europe (92.7 %), and 63.2 % have been in practice >10 years. Fracture displacement, comorbidities and age were the most influential factors for decision-making. For non-displaced fractures, 78.8 % of respondents recommended conservative treatment for patients aged 70-80 years, and 83.7 % for those aged 80-90 years. For displaced fractures, 70.9 % preferred surgery for patients aged 70-80 years, whereas this preference decreased to 47.9 % for those aged 80-90 years. Posterior C1-2 fixation was the most common technique for 67.3 % of respondents, and 48.3 % prescribe a collar postoperatively. 51.3 % routinely order CT imaging postoperatively to assess for bony fusion. For conservative treatment, 59.3 % prescribe an external orthosis for 3 months. Discussion and conclusion: Our survey found both variability and consistency in treatment practices of geriatric type II odontoid fractures, reflecting the ongoing debate and lack of consensus in clinical decision-making.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.