Unilateral facet dislocations: Is surgery really the preferred option?

Abstract

Study design: Systematic review.

Objective: To compare the safety and effectiveness of initial surgery versus nonoperative management of unilateral facet dislocations with or without fractures.

Summary of background: Unilateral facet injuries represent between 6% – 10% of all cervical spine injuries and yet optimal treatment for these injuries has not been established. The surgeon is faced with the decision of whether to manage the injury operatively or nonoperatively. Providing evidence to support this decision is necessary and is the rationale behind this article.

Methods: A systematic review of the English language literature was undertaken for articles published between 1970 and August 2009. Electronic databases and reference lists of key articles were searched to identify studies evaluating surgery and nonoperative management of unilateral facet dislocations. Bilateral facet dislocations, isolated facet fractures (without dislocation), and complete spinal cord injuries were excluded. Two independent reviewers assessed the level of evidence quality using the GRADE criteria and disagreements were resolved by consensus.

Results: We identified six articles meeting our inclusion criteria. Treatment failure, neurological deterioration, and persistent pain occurred more frequently in patients treated nonoperatively versus patients treated with surgery. Surgical patients experienced infections and surgical related complications not experience by those managed nonoperatively. Patients treated surgically after failed nonoperative management also experienced better outcomes than those who continued to be managed nonoperatively.

Conclusion: When faced with a patient requesting treatment recommendations for their acute unilateral facet dislocation, the surgeon can state that treatment failure, persistent pain, and neurological deterioration occur more frequently with nonoperative treatment based on the available literature. Ultimately it will be the preference of the patient that will decide between these two treatment approaches.

References

• 1 Harrington Jr J F, Park M C. Single level arthrodesis as treatment for midcervical fracture subluxation: a cohort study.  J Spinal Disord Tech. 2007;  20 42-48
• 2 Henriques T, Olerud C, Bergman A. et al . Distractive flexion injuries of the subaxial cervical spine treated with anterior plate alone.  J Spinal Disord Tech. 2004;  17 1-7
• 3 Kwon B K, Fisher C G, Boyd M C. et al . A prospective randomized controlled trial of anterior compared with posterior stabilization for unilateral facet injuries of the cervical spine.  J Neurosurg Spine. 2007;  7 1-12
• 4 Shapiro S, Snyder W, Kaufman K. et al . Outcome of 51 cases of unilateral locked cervical facets: interspinous braided cable for lateral mass plate fusion compared with interspinous wire and facet wiring with iliac crest.  J Neurosurg. 1999;  91 19-24
• 5 Beyer C A, Cabanela M E, Berquist T H. Unilateral facet dislocations and fracture-dislocations of the cervical spine.  J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1991;  73 977-981
• 6 Rorabeck C H, Rock M G, Hawkins R J. et al . Unilateral facet dislocation of the cervical spine. An analysis of the results of treatment in 26 patients.  Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1987;  12 23-27