A Surgical Algorithm for Upper Cervical Trauma Based on the AO Spine Upper Cervical Injury Classification System

Study Design. Global cross-sectional survey Objective. To establish a surgical algorithm for upper cervical spine injuries using the AO Spine Upper Cervical Injury Classification (UCIC) system, defining operative thresholds using a novel proposed Upper Cervical AO-Spine Injury Score (UC-AOSIS). Summary of Background Data. The AO Spine UCIC system provides a hierarchical, morphology-based classification for upper cervical spine trauma. Although reliability has been previously demonstrated, there is no established consensus on operative versus nonoperative management for specific UCIC subtypes. Methods. A survey including clinical vignettes of UCIC injury types (A3, B1, B2, B3, and C1), modified by neurological grades (N0-N4) and case-specific modifiers (M1-M5), was distributed to orthopaedic spine surgeons/neurosurgeons across AO Spine regions. Surgeons were asked whether a patient should undergo operative/nonoperative management for each scenario. Decision-making patterns were analyzed to identify severity thresholds, which were incorporated into a scoring framework. Results. A total of 159 surgeons responded. An operative consensus threshold of 70% agreement was determined by AO Spine Knowledge Forum Trauma methodology, with consensus reached for most injury patterns. Across all regions and surgical subspecialties, fracture patterns with UC-AOSIS scores ≤3 were consistently managed nonoperatively, while those with scores ≥5 were treated operatively. Injuries given a score of 4 demonstrated variable surgeon preference, falling into an “equipoise” zone without strong consensus for either approach. Conclusion. The AO Spine Upper Cervical Classification System, combined with international multispecialty surgeon input, enabled creation of a novel surgical algorithm for upper cervical trauma (UC-AOSIS). High-severity morphology (B3, C1), unstable B2 subtypes, and any associated neurologic impairment (N2-N4) meet operative thresholds. Level of Evidence. 4

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Spine
Published
2026-08-24
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1097/brs.0000000000005825
Primary Topic
Cervical and Thoracic Myelopathy
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

A Surgical Algorithm for Upper Cervical Trauma Based on the AO Spine Upper Cervical Injury Classification System

Mitchell K. Ng, Richard Bransford, Andrei Joaquim, Sebastian Bigdon et al.
Spine
Cervical and Thoracic Myelopathy
article

A Surgical Algorithm for Upper Cervical Trauma Based on the AO Spine Upper Cervical Injury Classification System

Mitchell K. Ng, Richard Bransford, Andrei Joaquim, Sebastian Bigdon, Mohammad El-Sharkawi, Harvinder Singh Chhabra, Gregory D. Schroeder, Jonathan Dalton, Alexander R. Vaccaro, Klaus Schnake
article en

Abstract

Study Design. Global cross-sectional survey Objective. To establish a surgical algorithm for upper cervical spine injuries using the AO Spine Upper Cervical Injury Classification (UCIC) system, defining operative thresholds using a novel proposed Upper Cervical AO-Spine Injury Score (UC-AOSIS). Summary of Background Data. The AO Spine UCIC system provides a hierarchical, morphology-based classification for upper cervical spine trauma. Although reliability has been previously demonstrated, there is no established consensus on operative versus nonoperative management for specific UCIC subtypes. Methods. A survey including clinical vignettes of UCIC injury types (A3, B1, B2, B3, and C1), modified by neurological grades (N0-N4) and case-specific modifiers (M1-M5), was distributed to orthopaedic spine surgeons/neurosurgeons across AO Spine regions. Surgeons were asked whether a patient should undergo operative/nonoperative management for each scenario. Decision-making patterns were analyzed to identify severity thresholds, which were incorporated into a scoring framework. Results. A total of 159 surgeons responded. An operative consensus threshold of 70% agreement was determined by AO Spine Knowledge Forum Trauma methodology, with consensus reached for most injury patterns. Across all regions and surgical subspecialties, fracture patterns with UC-AOSIS scores ≤3 were consistently managed nonoperatively, while those with scores ≥5 were treated operatively. Injuries given a score of 4 demonstrated variable surgeon preference, falling into an “equipoise” zone without strong consensus for either approach. Conclusion. The AO Spine Upper Cervical Classification System, combined with international multispecialty surgeon input, enabled creation of a novel surgical algorithm for upper cervical trauma (UC-AOSIS). High-severity morphology (B3, C1), unstable B2 subtypes, and any associated neurologic impairment (N2-N4) meet operative thresholds. Level of Evidence. 4

Spine
University of Bern (CH), Universidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP) (BR), University of Washington (US), Thomas Jefferson University Hospital (US), Harborview Medical Center (US), Nuremberg Hospital (DE), Malteser Waldkrankenhaus Erlangen (DE), Paracelsus Medizinische Privatuniversität (DE), Klinik Sonnenhof (CH), Rothman Institute (US), All India Institute of Medical Sciences (IN), Assiut University (EG)
Peace, Justice and strong institutions
Openalex Percentile: Top 8%
Cervical and Thoracic Myelopathy
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.