• Min Cheol Chang, Hyun-Gyu Seok, Yoo Jin Choo, and Gun Woo Lee.
• Department of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Yeungnam University College of Medicine, Yeungnam University Hospital, Daegu, Korea.
• World Neurosurg. 2022 Aug 1; 164: e1007-e1014.

ObjectiveBoth transarticular screw fixation (TAS) and segmental screw-rod fixation (SF) have been widely performed for C1-2 fusion; however, just only small clinical studies and a few meta-analyses comparing the 2 surgical techniques for C1-2 posterior fusion have been reported.MethodsWe searched the Cochrane, Embase, and Medline databases for articles comparing the intraoperative and postoperative outcomes of TAS and SF for C1-2 posterior fusion with April 14, 2022, as the publication cutoff date. The odds ratio (OR) and standardized mean difference were used to analyze differences in outcomes between the 2 abovementioned surgical techniques. A P value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.ResultsA total of 5101 publications were assessed, and 6 studies were finally included in the study. In terms of the fusion rate, SF produced significantly better outcomes than TAS did (OR = 2.96, P = 0.02). With respect to surgical outcomes, blood loss and operation times were significantly lower in the TAS group than those in the SF group (P = 0.008 and P < 0.00001, respectively). The rate of vertebral artery injury was significantly lower in the SF group than that in the TAS group (OR = 3.95, P = 0.04). However, other complications, such as screw malposition, infection, hardware failure, and nonunion, were not significantly different between the 2 groups.ConclusionsSF showed a greater fusion rate and lower risk of vertebral artery injury than TAS did, but TAS showed less blood loss and lower operation times than SF.Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

18 keywords...

hide…