IntroductionFractures of the odontoid process of the axis have been the subject of many investigations, but most articles do not consider the biological impact of age. Few publications cover the subject in the elderly population, although odontoid fractures are the most common fractures of the cervical spine in this age group. There is still a lack of agreement on the best method of treatment among patients over 65 years of age. Conservative treatment carries a high risk of developing non-union [15,19] as does halovest treatment [8]. Posterior C1-C2 fusion according to Gallie has long been the method of choice. The Gallie technique, however, is not biomechanically optimal and has a failure rate of 1/5 [9]. By adding transarticular screws the mechanical situation was improved [14,16]. Recently, the anterior screw technique according to has gained increased popularity. In most reports, younger and older patients have been grouped together. Few publications have examined the results explicitly in the elderly population. Berlemann and Schwarzenbach [5] advocated the anterior screw technique in the elderly.The present study is a review of a consecutive series of odontoid fractures in patients over 65 years of age treated at our department between 1988 and 1994. The results of anterior screw fixation, posterior C1-C2 fusion, and conservative treatment are compared.
Materials and methodsThe series consists of 29 consecutive patients (18 women) with a mean age of 78 (66-99) years with odontoid fractures treated at our department between 1988 and 1994. Patient demographics and results are presented in the Table 1. Twenty-four of the fractures were Abstract This study is a retrospective analysis of patients older than 65 years with odontoid fractures. The series consisted of 29 consecutive patients with odontoid fractures (18 women, mean age 78, range 66-99 years). Twenty-six patients were neurologically intact, Frankel E, whereas three had neurological symptoms: two Frankel D and one Frankel C. Eleven patients were treated with anterior screw fixation according to Böhler, seven with a posterior C1-C2 fusion. Ten patients with either minimally displaced fractures or with complicating medical conditions were treated conservatively. At follow-up, 7/7 patients with posterior fusion had healed without any problems, whereas 8/11 patients treated with anterior screw fixation, and 7/10 conservatively treated patients were either failures or had healed, but after a complicated course of events. We conclude that anterior screw fixation according to Böhler is associated with an unacceptably high rate of problems in the elderly. Probable causes may be osteoporosis with comminution at the fracture site, or stiffness of the cervical spine preventing ideal positioning of the screws. As non-operative treatment also often fails, the method of choice seems to be posterior C1-C2 fusion.