Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

LIVE: Thursday 27th June 2024, 18:00-19:30 (CEST)
Join our expert panel to discover why you need to understand the drivers of non-adherence in your patients, and how you can optimize medication adherence in your clinics to drastically improve patient outcomes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Current Reviews in Musculoskeletal Medicine
Published in: Current Reviews in Musculoskeletal Medicine 4/2016

01-12-2016 | Cervical Injuries and Treatment (HJ Kim, Section Editor)

Subaxial cervical spine trauma

Authors: Eric Feuchtbaum, Jacob Buchowski, Lukas Zebala

Published in: Current Reviews in Musculoskeletal Medicine | Issue 4/2016

Login to get access

Abstract

Subaxial cervical spine trauma is common and an often missed diagnosis. Accurate and efficient diagnosis and management is necessary to avoid devastating complications such as spinal cord injury. Several classification schemes have been devised to help categorize fractures of the subaxial spine and define treatment algorithms. The Subaxial Cervical Spine Injury Classification System (SLIC) is widely used and evaluates not only fracture morphology but also considers ligamentous injury and neurological status in surgical decision making. However, interobserver reliability is poor, which proves to be the defining pitfall of this tool. More modern classification systems have been developed, which aim to improve the interobserver reliability; however, further large-scale studies are needed for more definitive evaluation. Overall, treatment of subaxial cervical spine injuries should include a protocol with initial trauma evaluation, leading to expedient operative intervention if indicated. Surgical techniques include both anterior and posterior approaches to the cervical spine depending on fracture classification.
Literature
1.
Lowery DW, Wald MM, Browne BJ, Tigges S, Hoffman JR, Mower WR. Epidemiology of cervical spine injury victims. Ann Emerg Med. 2001;38:12–6.CrossRefPubMed
2.
Aebi M. Surgical treatment of upper, middle and lower cervical injuries and non-unions by anterior procedures. Eur Spine J. 2010;19(1, suppl1):S33–9.CrossRefPubMed
3.
Goldberg W, Mueller C, Panacek E, Tigges S, Hoffman JR, Mower WR. Distribution and patterns of blunt traumatic cervical spine injury. Ann Emerg Med. 2001;38:17–21.CrossRefPubMed
4.
Jones C, Jazayeri F. Evolving standards of practice for cervical spine imaging in trauma: a retrospective review. Australas Radiol. 2007;51:420–42.CrossRefPubMed
5.
McCulloch PT, France J, Jones DL, et al. Helical computed tomography alone compared with plain radiographs with adjunct computed tomography to evaluate the cervical spine after high-energy trauma. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2005;87:2388–239.PubMed
6.
Schenarts PJ, Diaz J, Kaiser C, et al. Prospective comparison of admission computed tomographic scan and plain films of the upper cervical spine in trauma patients with altered mental status. J Trauma. 2001;51:663–8.CrossRefPubMed
7.
Sim V, Bernstein MP, Frangos SG, Wilson CT, Simon RJ, McStay CM, et al. The (f)utility of flexion-extension C-spine films in the setting of trauma. Am J Surg. 2013;206(6):929–33.CrossRefPubMed
8.
McCracken B, Klineberg E, Pickard B, Wisner DH. Flexion and extension radiographic evaluation for the clearance of potential cervical spine injures in trauma patients. Eur Spine J. 2013;22(7):1467–73.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
9.
Sanchez B, Waxman K, Jones T, Conner S, Chung R, Becerra S. Cervical spine clearance in blunt trauma: evaluation of a computed tomography-based protocol. J Trauma. 2005;59(1):179–83.CrossRefPubMed
10.
Antevil JL, Sise MJ, Sack DI, Kidder B, Hopper A, Brown CV. Spiral computed tomography for the initial evaluation of spine trauma: a new standard of care? J Trauma. 2006;61(2):382–7.CrossRefPubMed
11.
• Bush L, Brookshire R, Roche B, Johnson A, Cole F, Karmy-Jones R, Long W, Martin MJ. Evaluation of cervical spine clearance by computed tomographic scan alone in intoxicated patients with blunt trauma. JAMA Surg. 2016;151(9):807–13. This prospective observational study has high potential to change medical decision making processes not only for spine surgeons but also for emergency room physicians. It provides sound evidence that CT scan can be used to clear cervical spine injuries in the intoxicated patient therefore preventing a delay in clearance and unnecessary cervical immobilization.
12.
• Chew BG, Swartz C, Quigley MR, Altman DT, Daffner RH, Wilberger JE. Cervical spine clearance in the traumatically injured patient: is multidetector CT scanning sufficient alone? Clinical article. J Neurosurg Spine. 2013;19(5):576–81. This study may provide guidance on the use of CT scan to clear cervical of injuries in polytrauma patients in which many distracting variable exist. The results of this study can have meaningful impact in cutting down on the use of unnecessary and costly additional imaging tools such as magnetic resonance imaging.CrossRefPubMed
13.
• Mascarenhas D, Dreizin D, Bodanapally UK, Stein DM. Parsing the utility of CT and MRI in the Subaxial Cervical Spine Injury Classification (SLIC) System: is CT SLIC enough? AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2016;206(6):1292–7. This study helps define the role of MRI for evaluation of cervical spine injuries. It demonstrates that CT scan alone may be accurate enough for the initial triage of trauma patients to evaluate for cervical spine injury. MRI provides little benefit in conjunction with CT scan for the initial evaluation of the patient and may be reserved for surgical planning. Overall this study will help decrease the number of unnecessary and costly MRI studies orders.CrossRefPubMed
14.
• Pourtaheri S, Emami A, Sinha K, Faloon M, Hwang K, Shafa E, et al. The role of magnetic resonance imaging in acute cervical spine fractures. Spine J. 2014;14(11):2546–53. This study better defines the role of MRI in evaluating for potential cervical spine injuries which can help decrease the number of MR orders that are not only unnecessary but cost-inefficient.CrossRefPubMed
15.
Allen Jr BL, Ferguson RL, Lehmann TR, O’Brien RP. A mechanistic classification of closed, indirect fractures and dislocations of the lower cervical spine. Spine. 1982;7(1):1–27.CrossRefPubMed
16.
Magerl F, Aebi M, Gertzbein SD, Harms J, Nazarian S. A comprehensive classification of thoracic and lumbar injuries. Eur Spine J. 1994;3(4):184–201.CrossRefPubMed
17.
Vaccaro AR, Hulbert RJ, Patel AA, Spine Trauma Study Group, et al. The Subaxial Cervical Spine Injury Classification System: a novel approach to recognize the importance of morphology, neurology, and integrity of the disco-ligamentous complex. Spine. 2007;32(21):2365–74.CrossRefPubMed
18.
Joaquim AF, Lawrence B, Daubs M, Brodke D, Patel AA. Evaluation of the Subaxial Injury Classification System. J Craniovertebr Junction Spine. 2011;2(2):67–72.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
19.
Lee WJ, Yoon SH, Kim YJ, Kim JY, Park HC, Park CO. Interobserver and intraobserver reliability of sub-axial injury classification and severity scale between radiologist, resident and spine surgeon. J Korean Neurosurg Soc. 2012;52(3):200–3.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
20.
Whang PG, Patel AA, Vaccaro AR. The development and evaluation of the subaxial injury classification scoring system for cervical spine trauma. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2011;469(3):723–31.CrossRefPubMed
21.
Stone AT, Bransford RJ, Lee MJ, Vlela MD, Bellabarba C, Anderson PA, et al. Reliability of classification systems for subaxial cervical injuries. Evid Based Spine Car J. 2010;1:19–26.CrossRef
22.
van Middendorp JJ, Audige L, Bartels RH, Bolger C, Deverall H, Dhoke P, et al. The Subaxial Cervical Spine Injury Classification System: an external agreement validation study. Spine J. 2013;13(9):1055–63.CrossRefPubMed
23.
Kepler CK, Vaccaro AR, Koerner JD, et al. Reliability analysis of the AOSpine Thoracolumbar Spine Injury Classification System by a worldwide group of naive spinal surgeons. Eur Spine J. 2015.
24.
• Vaccaro AR, Koerner JD, Radcliff KE, Oner FC, Reinhold M, Schnake KJ, et al. AOSpine Subaxial Cervical Spine Injury Classification System. Eur Spine J. 2016;25(7):2173–84. Previously, several cervical spine injury classification systems existed however now were universally accepted, validated and reliable. This study outlines a new comprehensive classification system for cervical spine injuries that includes a high intra- and interobserver reliability that allows for appropriate diagnosis, decision making and use as a research tool.CrossRefPubMed
25.
Urrutia J, Zamora T, Yurac R, Campos M, Palma J, Mobarec S, Prada C. An independent inter- and intra-observer agreement evaluation of the AOSpine Subaxial Cervical Spine Injury Classification. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2015.
26.
Silva OT, Sabba MF, Lira HI, Ghizoni E, Tedeschi H, Patel AA, Joaquim AF. Evaluation of the reliability and validity of the newer AOSpine Subaxial Cervical Injury Classification (C-3 to C-7). J Neurosurg Spine. 2016: 1-6.
27.
Joaquim AF, Patel AA. Subaxial cervical spine trauma: evaluation and surgical decision making. Glob Spine J. 2014;4:63–70.CrossRef
28.
Bracken MB, Shepard MJ, Collins WF, et al. A randomized, controlled trial of methylprednisolone or naloxone in the treatment of acute spinal-cord injury. Results of the Second National Acute Spinal Cord Injury Study. N Engl J Med. 1990;322:1405–11.CrossRefPubMed
29.
Hurlbert RJ, Hadley MN, Walters BC, et al. Pharmacological therapy for acute spinal cord injury. Neurosurgery. 2013;72 suppl 2:93–105.CrossRefPubMed
30.
Fehlings MG, Wilson JR, Cho N. Methylprednisolone for the treatment of acute spinal cord injury: counterpoint. Neurosurgery. 2014;61 suppl 1:36–42.CrossRefPubMed
31.
Fehlings MG, Vaccaro A, Wilson JR, et al. Early versus delayed decompression for traumatic cervical spinal cord injury: results of the Surgical Timing in Acute Spinal Cord Injury Study (STASCIS). PLoS One. 2012;7:e32037.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
32.
• Furlan JC, Craven BC, Massicotte EM, Fehlings MG. Early versus delayed surgical decompression of spinal cord after traumatic cervical spinal cord injury: a cost-utility analysis. World Neurosurg. 2016;88:166–74. It is imperative to make cost conscious decisions in our current medical environment given the rising cost of healthcare and limited available resources. This study provides data that can impact spine surgeon decision making that not only provides optimal patient outcomes but also provides a service in a cost effective manner.CrossRefPubMed
33.
Samuel S, Lin JL, Smith MM, Hartin NL, Vasili C, Ruff SJ, et al. Subaxial injury classification scoring system treatment recommendations: external agreement study based on retrospective review of 185 patients. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2015;40(3):137–42.CrossRef
34.
Kwon BK, Fisher CF, Boyd MC, et al. A prospective randomized controlled trial of anterior compared to posterior stabilization for unilateral facet injuries of the cervical spine. J Neurosurg Spine. 2007;7(1):1–12.CrossRefPubMed
35.
Brodke DS, Anderson PA, Newell DW, Grady MS, Champan JR. Comparison of anterior and posterior approaches in cervical spinal cord injuries. J Spinal Disord Tech. 2003;1(3):229–35.CrossRef
36.
Rizzolo SJ, Piazza MR, Cotler JM, et al. Intervertebral disc injury complicating cervical spine trauma. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1991;16:S187–9.CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Subaxial cervical spine trauma
Authors
Eric Feuchtbaum
Jacob Buchowski
Lukas Zebala
Publication date
01-12-2016
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Current Reviews in Musculoskeletal Medicine / Issue 4/2016
Electronic ISSN: 1935-9748
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12178-016-9377-0

Other articles of this Issue 4/2016

Current Reviews in Musculoskeletal Medicine 4/2016 Go to the issue

Outcomes Research in Orthopedics (O Ayeni, Section Editor)

Sources and quality of literature addressing femoroacetabular impingement: a scoping review 2011–2015

Pediatric Orthopedics (B Heyworth, Section Editor)

The natural history and management of brachial plexus birth palsy

Outcomes Research in Orthopedics (O Ayeni, Section Editor)

Shoulder acromioclavicular joint reconstruction options and outcomes

Pediatric Orthopedics (B Heyworth, Section Editor)

Current management of aneurysmal bone cysts

Social Media and Orthopedics (P Sculco, Section Editor)

Social media and your practice: navigating the surgeon-patient relationship

Pediatric Orthopedics (B Heyworth, Section Editor)

Hip dysplasia in the young adult caused by residual childhood and adolescent-onset dysplasia