What question did this study set out to answer?

To compare surgical approaches for the management of Hangman fractures, specifically evaluating posterior fixation versus anterior discectomy and fusion methods.

May 29, 2026Spine Surgery and Related Research0 citationsOpen Access

Advantages of Posterior Harms-Goel C1C3 Fixation over Anterior C2C3 Discectomy and Fusion with Plate and Screws for Highly Unstable Hangman's Fracture: Time to Close the Debate?

NBNathan Beucler

Key Points

To compare surgical approaches for the management of Hangman fractures, specifically evaluating posterior fixation versus anterior discectomy and fusion methods.
Examined five cases of Levine-Edwards type 2 or 2a subacute Hangman fractures
Evaluated outcomes following C2C3 anterior discectomy and fusion
Discussed surgical considerations and postoperative management implications.
Reported successful outcomes using anterior discectomy and fusion but highlighted concerns regarding technique generalization
Emphasized the need for cautious application of these methods in all unstable Hangman's fractures
Questioned long-term stability and potential complications related to both surgical approaches.

Abstract

We read with interest Sonawane et al.'s 1) study on the surgical management of Hangman fracture of the upper cervical spine using the anterior approach.The authors address the issue of patients suffering from Levine-Edwards type 2 or 2a subacute Hangman fractures of C2, left untreated for at least 3 weeks before referral.They report their experience treating five such cases using solely C2C3 anterior discectomy and fusion with iliac crest bone graft, plate, and screws.Although we congratulate the authors for their fortunate results with this patient series, we have a few concerns regarding surgical considerations, postoperative management, and the generalization of this technique to all unstable cases of Hangman's fracture.

Ask AI

Helpful

Bookmark

View Full Paper