Affiliation:
1. Medicana İnternational İzmir Hastanesi
2. Medicana İnternational İstanbul Bahçelievler Hastanesi
3. UNIVERSITY OF HEALTH SCIENCES, İZMİR TEPECİK HEALTH RESEARCH CENTER
4. EGE UNIVERSITY, EGE FACULTY OF MEDICINE
Abstract
Aim: Previous studies have outlined various surgical approaches to treatment of basilar invagination, but none have compared multiple different treatment options using objective clinical and radiological criteria.
Material and Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the records of 30 patients with basilar invagination treated by five different surgical approaches. The surgical outcomes were evaluated and compared using objective clinical (Ranawat score) and radiological parameters (Chamberlain distance, atlantodental interval, and craniovertebral angle).
Results: Our results show a statistically significant improvement in the Ranawat score for patients undergoing 1) anterior decompression with posterior stabilization, 2) posterior decompression with posterior stabilization, and 3) the Goel procedure (posterior decompression, posterior reduction, cage distraction, and posterior stabilization). Of these, the Goel procedure produced the most significant improvement in functional and radiographic outcomes. Neither group without posterior stabilization (posterior decompression alone or endoscopic transnasal odontoidectomy alone) had a significant improvement in Ranawat score or radiographic outcomes.
Conclusion: For surgical management of basilar invagination, a combination of posterior decompression, posterior reduction, cage distraction, and posterior stabilization yielded the best clinical and radiological outcome. There is a risk of craniocervical instability and kyphosis and recurrence of stenosis in patients treated surgically without posterior stabilization. Therefore, when deciding on bacillary invagination surgery without posterior stabilization, it should be carefully considered.
Publisher
Turkish Journal of Clinics and Laboratory
Subject
Applied Mathematics,General Mathematics