ArticleJournal of craniovertebral junction & spine
Comparison of outcomes in the management of Type II odontoid fractures in young patients - Is surgery overrated?
Article in Journal of craniovertebral junction & spine. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: The options for the management of type II odontoid fractures in young patients include anterior screw fixation, posterior spinal fusion, or halo-vest immobilization (HVI). However, there is a recent trend away from nonoperative management and an increase in primary operative stabilization across several centers. Hence, our study aims to compare the functional and radiological outcomes of type II odontoid fractures in young patients managed with HVI and surgery. Materials and Methods: A retrospective analysis of 70 patients with type II odontoid fracture who were managed in our institution with a mean age of 47 years was included in our study. The clinical details included the Neck Disability Index (NDI), Visual Analog Scale (VAS) for neck pain, and S-Range of Movement (ROM)-Neck score. Radiological details included union status, atlanto-dens interval, amount of displacement and angulation, and transverse ligament injury. Both the clinical and radiological parameters were compared between the patients who underwent HVI ( Results: The mean ± standard deviation follow-up duration was 4.2 ± 2.5 years in the HVI group and 3.8 ± 2.7 years in the surgery group. Of the clinical parameters, the S-ROM-Neck score was significantly better in the HVI group than in the surgery group ( Conclusion: For type II odontoid fractures in young patients, HVI had better clinical outcomes compared to the surgery and should be considered the first line of management.
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.