header advert
Orthopaedic Proceedings Logo

Receive monthly Table of Contents alerts from Orthopaedic Proceedings

Comprehensive article alerts can be set up and managed through your account settings

View my account settings

Visit Orthopaedic Proceedings at:

Loading...

Loading...

Full Access

General Orthopaedics

RISK FACTORS FOR NON-UNION IN THE NON-OPERATIVE MANAGEMENT OF TYPE II DENS FRACTURES

Australian Orthopaedic Association Limited (AOA)



Abstract

Despite the publication of numerous studies, controversy regarding the non- operative treatment of type II dens fractures remains. The halo-thoracic vest (HTV) and cervical collar are the most commonly used devices. We sought to compare the outcomes of patients managed with these devices in terms of non-union risk factors and associated complication rates.

This study was a retrospective review of adult patients with type II dens fractures treated non-operatively at a level one trauma centre between 2001 and 2007. The patients were identified using a hospital trauma database. Each patient included in the study had a minimum follow up of six months. Patient medical records and imaging studies were reviewed. Union was defined as stable fibrous union or bony union, measured at three months. A p-value of < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Sixty-seven patients were included. Thirty-five patients were treated using a HTV and 32 with a collar. Non-union was found to be associated with increased time in HTV or collar (p = 0.011) and with a mechanism of injury involving a low fall (p = 0.008). In addition, the proportion of patients with stable union at three months was 60% for the HVT group versus 35% for the cervical collar group (p = 0.10). There were trends to support an increased risk of non-union with a patient age of greater than or equal to 65 years at the time of presentation (p = 0.13) as well as with a fracture displacement of greater than or equal to 2 mm at time of presentation (p = 0.17). Clinically significant complications of the HTV were of greater prevalence than those experienced by collar patients. Sixty percent of HTV patients suffered one or more complications compared with 6% of collar patients.

We were unable to demonstrate any clear advantage or disadvantage of either device. Further investigation of mortality would be beneficial, particularly in the patient group injured with a mechanism involving a low fall (which tends to include more elderly patients).