A Systematic Review Evaluating the Surgical Management of Cervical Spine Fractures in Patients With Ankylosing Spondylitis

Patients with ankylosing spondylitis (AS) are vulnerable to cervical spinal fractures despite minute trauma. As there is a lack of consensus on which surgical approach is the most efficacious in treating cervical spinal fractures in AS patients, we sought to compare the posterior-only and combined (anterior-posterior) approach regarding intraoperative and postoperative complications. This systematic review was registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) database (ID: CRD42024284877). Studies published up to May 20, 2025, were searched in PubMed, MEDLINE, and CENTRAL (Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials) with predetermined terms. Studies reporting outcomes, including intraoperative and postoperative complications and mortality rate, were evaluated. Included studies underwent a risk of bias assessment. Seventeen studies (one prospective, 16 retrospective) involving 858 patients (with AS and cervical spine fractures) with an average age of 59.9 years were included. The most common mechanism of injury was minor trauma (173, 66%), and C6-7 was the most common level injured (185, 50.6%). Although the posterior-only approach yielded fewer intraoperative complications (4 (4.8%) vs. 2 (15%); p>0.05), postoperative complications (17 (7.5%) vs. 16 (22.6%); p>0.05), and instrument-related complications (1 (2.8%) vs. 3 (12.5%); p>0.05) compared to the combined approach, the difference was not statistically significant. However, the combined approach recorded a significantly lower mortality rate (3 (9.2%) vs. 13 (24.5%); p>0.05) when compared with the posterior-only approach. The results of this systematic review suggest that both the combined and posterior-only approaches have advantages and disadvantages and approach selection should be done on a case-by-case basis. Future randomized controlled trials directly evaluating the efficacy of surgical approaches in such patients are needed to form a consensus.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Cureus
Published
2025-12-24
DOI
https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.99991
Primary Topic
Spondyloarthritis Studies and Treatments
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

A Systematic Review Evaluating the Surgical Management of Cervical Spine Fractures in Patients With Ankylosing Spondylitis

Shahswar Arif, Zarina Brady, Christopher McKee, Jagdeesh Nijjher et al.
Cureus
Spondyloarthritis Studies and Treatments
article

A Systematic Review Evaluating the Surgical Management of Cervical Spine Fractures in Patients With Ankylosing Spondylitis

Shahswar Arif, Zarina Brady, Christopher McKee, Jagdeesh Nijjher, Nikolay Peev, Reagan O'kane, Rakesh Dhokia, Ciaran Doherty
article en

Abstract

Patients with ankylosing spondylitis (AS) are vulnerable to cervical spinal fractures despite minute trauma. As there is a lack of consensus on which surgical approach is the most efficacious in treating cervical spinal fractures in AS patients, we sought to compare the posterior-only and combined (anterior-posterior) approach regarding intraoperative and postoperative complications. This systematic review was registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) database (ID: CRD42024284877). Studies published up to May 20, 2025, were searched in PubMed, MEDLINE, and CENTRAL (Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials) with predetermined terms. Studies reporting outcomes, including intraoperative and postoperative complications and mortality rate, were evaluated. Included studies underwent a risk of bias assessment. Seventeen studies (one prospective, 16 retrospective) involving 858 patients (with AS and cervical spine fractures) with an average age of 59.9 years were included. The most common mechanism of injury was minor trauma (173, 66%), and C6-7 was the most common level injured (185, 50.6%). Although the posterior-only approach yielded fewer intraoperative complications (4 (4.8%) vs. 2 (15%); p>0.05), postoperative complications (17 (7.5%) vs. 16 (22.6%); p>0.05), and instrument-related complications (1 (2.8%) vs. 3 (12.5%); p>0.05) compared to the combined approach, the difference was not statistically significant. However, the combined approach recorded a significantly lower mortality rate (3 (9.2%) vs. 13 (24.5%); p>0.05) when compared with the posterior-only approach. The results of this systematic review suggest that both the combined and posterior-only approaches have advantages and disadvantages and approach selection should be done on a case-by-case basis. Future randomized controlled trials directly evaluating the efficacy of surgical approaches in such patients are needed to form a consensus.

CureusVol. 17(12)
Queen's University Belfast (GB), Belfast Health and Social Care Trust (GB), University of Ulster (GB), Musgrave Park Hospital (GB), Altnagelvin Area Hospital (GB), Western Health and Social Care Trust (GB), Royal Victoria Hospital (GB)
Good health and well-being
Openalex Percentile: Top 28%
Spondyloarthritis Studies and Treatments
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.