Surgical treatment of traumatic cervical facet dislocation: anterior, posterior or combined approaches?
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2016 |
Outros Autores: | , |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | eng |
Título da fonte: | Arquivos de neuro-psiquiatria (Online) |
Texto Completo: | http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0004-282X2016000900745 |
Resumo: | ABSTRACT Surgical treatment is well accepted for patients with traumatic cervical facet joint dislocations (CFD), but there is uncertainty over which approach is better: anterior, posterior or combined. We performed a systematic literature review to evaluate the indications for anterior and posterior approaches in the management of CFD. Anterior approaches can restore cervical lordosis, and cause less postoperative pain and less wound problems. Posterior approaches are useful for direct reduction of locked facet joints and provide stronger fixation from a biomechanical point of view. Combined approaches can be used in more complex cases. Although both anterior and posterior approaches can be used interchangeably, there are some patients who may benefit from one of them over the other, as discussed in this review. Surgeons who treat cervical spine trauma should be able to perform both procedures as well as combined approaches to adequately manage CFD and improve patients’ final outcomes. |
id |
ABNEURO-1_9dbd30429446ef5793a886611a9e8c41 |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:scielo:S0004-282X2016000900745 |
network_acronym_str |
ABNEURO-1 |
network_name_str |
Arquivos de neuro-psiquiatria (Online) |
repository_id_str |
|
spelling |
Surgical treatment of traumatic cervical facet dislocation: anterior, posterior or combined approaches?spinedislocationsbones fracturessurgeryABSTRACT Surgical treatment is well accepted for patients with traumatic cervical facet joint dislocations (CFD), but there is uncertainty over which approach is better: anterior, posterior or combined. We performed a systematic literature review to evaluate the indications for anterior and posterior approaches in the management of CFD. Anterior approaches can restore cervical lordosis, and cause less postoperative pain and less wound problems. Posterior approaches are useful for direct reduction of locked facet joints and provide stronger fixation from a biomechanical point of view. Combined approaches can be used in more complex cases. Although both anterior and posterior approaches can be used interchangeably, there are some patients who may benefit from one of them over the other, as discussed in this review. Surgeons who treat cervical spine trauma should be able to perform both procedures as well as combined approaches to adequately manage CFD and improve patients’ final outcomes.Academia Brasileira de Neurologia - ABNEURO2016-09-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersiontext/htmlhttp://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0004-282X2016000900745Arquivos de Neuro-Psiquiatria v.74 n.9 2016reponame:Arquivos de neuro-psiquiatria (Online)instname:Academia Brasileira de Neurologiainstacron:ABNEURO10.1590/0004-282X20160078info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessLins,Catarina C.Prado,Diego T.Joaquim,Andrei F.eng2016-09-28T00:00:00Zoai:scielo:S0004-282X2016000900745Revistahttp://www.scielo.br/anphttps://old.scielo.br/oai/scielo-oai.php||revista.arquivos@abneuro.org1678-42270004-282Xopendoar:2016-09-28T00:00Arquivos de neuro-psiquiatria (Online) - Academia Brasileira de Neurologiafalse |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Surgical treatment of traumatic cervical facet dislocation: anterior, posterior or combined approaches? |
title |
Surgical treatment of traumatic cervical facet dislocation: anterior, posterior or combined approaches? |
spellingShingle |
Surgical treatment of traumatic cervical facet dislocation: anterior, posterior or combined approaches? Lins,Catarina C. spine dislocations bones fractures surgery |
title_short |
Surgical treatment of traumatic cervical facet dislocation: anterior, posterior or combined approaches? |
title_full |
Surgical treatment of traumatic cervical facet dislocation: anterior, posterior or combined approaches? |
title_fullStr |
Surgical treatment of traumatic cervical facet dislocation: anterior, posterior or combined approaches? |
title_full_unstemmed |
Surgical treatment of traumatic cervical facet dislocation: anterior, posterior or combined approaches? |
title_sort |
Surgical treatment of traumatic cervical facet dislocation: anterior, posterior or combined approaches? |
author |
Lins,Catarina C. |
author_facet |
Lins,Catarina C. Prado,Diego T. Joaquim,Andrei F. |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Prado,Diego T. Joaquim,Andrei F. |
author2_role |
author author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Lins,Catarina C. Prado,Diego T. Joaquim,Andrei F. |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
spine dislocations bones fractures surgery |
topic |
spine dislocations bones fractures surgery |
description |
ABSTRACT Surgical treatment is well accepted for patients with traumatic cervical facet joint dislocations (CFD), but there is uncertainty over which approach is better: anterior, posterior or combined. We performed a systematic literature review to evaluate the indications for anterior and posterior approaches in the management of CFD. Anterior approaches can restore cervical lordosis, and cause less postoperative pain and less wound problems. Posterior approaches are useful for direct reduction of locked facet joints and provide stronger fixation from a biomechanical point of view. Combined approaches can be used in more complex cases. Although both anterior and posterior approaches can be used interchangeably, there are some patients who may benefit from one of them over the other, as discussed in this review. Surgeons who treat cervical spine trauma should be able to perform both procedures as well as combined approaches to adequately manage CFD and improve patients’ final outcomes. |
publishDate |
2016 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2016-09-01 |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article |
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0004-282X2016000900745 |
url |
http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0004-282X2016000900745 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
10.1590/0004-282X20160078 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
text/html |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Academia Brasileira de Neurologia - ABNEURO |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Academia Brasileira de Neurologia - ABNEURO |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
Arquivos de Neuro-Psiquiatria v.74 n.9 2016 reponame:Arquivos de neuro-psiquiatria (Online) instname:Academia Brasileira de Neurologia instacron:ABNEURO |
instname_str |
Academia Brasileira de Neurologia |
instacron_str |
ABNEURO |
institution |
ABNEURO |
reponame_str |
Arquivos de neuro-psiquiatria (Online) |
collection |
Arquivos de neuro-psiquiatria (Online) |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Arquivos de neuro-psiquiatria (Online) - Academia Brasileira de Neurologia |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
||revista.arquivos@abneuro.org |
_version_ |
1754212781035356160 |