ArticleBrain & spine2025
The surgical treatment of upper cervical spine trauma in octogenerians.
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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Surgical treatment of upper cervical spine injuries in older patients is increasing in high-income countries and carries risks due to comorbidities, impaired general health, and osteoporosis. Research question: The aim of this study was to compare the surgical outcomes in patients aged 80-90 years who underwent surgical treatment for upper cervical spine fractures with those in a younger population. Materials and methods: All patients who underwent navigated dorsal stabilization of upper cervical spine trauma with automated intraoperative CT (iCT)-based registration at a single institution were retrospectively analyzed. Clinical and radiological outcomes were compared between patients over and under 80 years of age. Results: A total of 61 patients underwent dorsal stabilization after a C1/2 fracture. The mean age was 72.3 ± 16.4 years; 31 patients (50.8 %) were 80 years or older. Forty patients had an isolated C2 fracture, 18 patients had combined C1 and C2 fractures, and three patients had a simultaneous C2 and C3 fracture. All patients were registered intraoperatively and scanned intraoperatively to check the screw position. No screw misplacements occurred. The clinical and radiological results did not differ between the group of patients over 80 years of age and the group of patients under 80 years of age (p > 0.05). Discussion and conclusion: Surgical treatment of upper cervical spine injuries in elderly patients is as safe and effective as in younger patients. Despite higher mortality and longer hospital stays, surgical outcomes were comparable in terms of complications and fusion rates.
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.