-
Annals of the Rheumatic Diseases May 2021MAXIMISE (Managing AXIal Manifestations in psorIatic arthritis with SEcukinumab) trial was designed to evaluate the efficacy of secukinumab in the management of axial... (Randomized Controlled Trial)
Randomized Controlled Trial
OBJECTIVES
MAXIMISE (Managing AXIal Manifestations in psorIatic arthritis with SEcukinumab) trial was designed to evaluate the efficacy of secukinumab in the management of axial manifestations of psoriatic arthritis (PsA).
METHODS
This phase 3b, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multi-centre 52-week trial included patients (≥18 years) diagnosed with PsA and classified by ClASsification criteria for Psoriatic Arthritis (CASPAR) criteria, with spinal pain Visual Analogue Score ≥40/100 and Bath Ankylosing Spondylitis Disease Activity Index (BASDAI) score ≥4 despite use of at least two non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs). Patients were randomised (1:1:1) to secukinumab 300 mg, secukinumab 150 mg or placebo weekly for 4 weeks and every 4 weeks thereafter. At week 12, placebo patients were re-randomised to secukinumab 300/150 mg. Primary endpoint was ASAS20 (Assessment of SpondyloArthritis international Society) response with secukinumab 300 mg at week 12.
RESULTS
Patients were randomly assigned; 167 to secukinumab 300 mg, 165 to secukinumab 150 mg and 166 to placebo. Secukinumab 300 mg and 150 mg significantly improved ASAS20 response versus placebo at week 12 (63% and 66% vs 31% placebo). The OR (95% CI) comparing secukinumab 300 mg and 150 mg versus placebo, using a logistic regression model after multiple imputation, was 3.8 (2.4 and 6.1) and 4.4 (2.7 and 7.0; p<0.0001).
CONCLUSIONS
Secukinumab 300 mg and 150 mg provided significant improvement in signs and symptoms of axial disease compared with placebo in patients with PsA and axial manifestations with inadequate response to NSAIDs.
TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER
NCT02721966.
Topics: Adult; Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized; Antirheumatic Agents; Arthritis, Psoriatic; Axis, Cervical Vertebra; Double-Blind Method; Female; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Severity of Illness Index; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 33334727
DOI: 10.1136/annrheumdis-2020-218808 -
The Journal of the American Academy of... Feb 2020Os odontoideum is a rare entity of the second cervical vertebra, characterized by a circumferentially corticated ossicle separated from the body of C2. The ossicle is a... (Review)
Review
Os odontoideum is a rare entity of the second cervical vertebra, characterized by a circumferentially corticated ossicle separated from the body of C2. The ossicle is a distinct entity from an odontoid fracture or a persistent ossiculum terminale. The diagnosis may be made incidentally on imaging obtained for the workup of neck pain or neurologic signs and symptoms. Diagnosis usually can be made with plain radiographs. MRI and CT can assess spinal cord integrity and C1-C2 instability. The etiology of os odontoideum is a topic of debate, with investigative studies supporting both congenital and traumatic origins. A wide clinical range of symptoms exists. Symptoms may present as nondescript pain or include occipital-cervical pain, myelopathy, or vertebrobasilar ischemia. Asymptomatic cases without evidence of radiologic instability are typically managed with periodic observation and serial imaging. The presence of atlantoaxial instability or neurological dysfunction necessitates surgical intervention with instrumentation and fusion for stability.
Topics: Axis, Cervical Vertebra; Child; Humans; Joint Instability; Spinal Fusion
PubMed: 31977608
DOI: 10.5435/JAAOS-D-18-00637 -
North American Spine Society Journal Jun 2023Combined atlas-axis fractures are rare occurrences with substantially higher rates of neurologic deficits compared with isolated injuries. Given the intricate anatomic... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Combined atlas-axis fractures are rare occurrences with substantially higher rates of neurologic deficits compared with isolated injuries. Given the intricate anatomic relationship between the atlas and axis vertebra, variable fracture patterns may occur, warranting special considerations from surgeons.
METHODS
A systematic search of PubMed and EMBASE was performed following the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Relevant studies on acute combined atlas-axis fractures that provided data on patient demographics, presentation (injury mechanism, neurologic deficits, fracture type), management, complications, and study conclusions were reviewed.
RESULTS
A total of 22 articles published from 1977 to 2022, comprising 230 patients, were included in the final analysis. Thirty-seven of the 213 patients (17%) presented with neurologic deficits. The most common atlas injuries were posterior arch fractures (54/169 patients; 32%), combined posterior arch/anterior arch fractures (44/169 patients; 26%), and anterior arch fractures (43/169 patients; 25%). The most common axis injuries were type II odontoid fractures (115/175 patients; 66%). Of the 127 patients managed operatively (127/230 patients; 55%), 45 patients (35%) were treated with C1-C2 posterior spinal fusion, 33 patients (26%) were treated with odontoid screw fixation and anterior/posterior C1-C2 trans-articular screws, 16 patients (13%) were treated with occiputocervical fusion and 12 patients (9%) were treated with odontoid screw fixation alone.
CONCLUSIONS
Management strategies are generally based on the type of axis fracture as well as the condition of the transverse ligament. Patients with stable fractures can be successfully managed nonoperatively with a cervical collar or halo immobilization. Combined atlas-axis fractures with an atlantodental interval >5 mm, C1 lateral mass displacement >7 mm, C2-C3 angulation >11° or an MRI demonstrating a disrupted transverse ligament are suggestive of instability and are often successfully managed with surgical intervention. There is no consensus regarding surgical technique.
PubMed: 37440984
DOI: 10.1016/j.xnsj.2023.100224 -
International Journal of Spine Surgery Dec 2020Injuries of the upper cervical spine are a major cause of morbidity and mortality due to associated spinal cord and head injuries. The injury patterns of the upper...
BACKGROUND
Injuries of the upper cervical spine are a major cause of morbidity and mortality due to associated spinal cord and head injuries. The injury patterns of the upper cervical spine are numerous, and the neurologic sequelae are diverse. The axis (C2) is the most commonly fractured vertebra in the upper cervical spine; its unique anatomy and architecture pose difficulties in the diagnosis and the management of its fractures.
METHODS
All cases of acute spinal injuries at Prince Mohammed Bin Abdulaziz Hospital in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, were screened for fractures of C2 vertebrae. These patients underwent computerized tomography (CT) imaging of the cervical spine with special attention paid to the cranio-cervical junction. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and angiography of the neck were performed to exclude ligamentous tears and vascular injuries. Unstable fractures were fixed surgically. In the remaining cases, a conservative trial was given. All patients were followed up once every 3 months for a period of 1 year. During follow-up, some patients underwent additional CT imaging of the cervical spine to monitor the healing of fractures.
RESULTS
Out of 230 spinal trauma patients, 43.5% suffered from cervical spine injury. C2 fractures were recorded in 26% cases, and fractures of the C2 vertebral body, including pedicles, laminae, lateral masses, and articular processes, were found in many cases, followed by odontoid fractures (50%). No case of atlanto-axial or atlanto-occipital dislocation was recorded. Road traffic accidents were found to be responsible for 92% of cases. The majority of patients were young males, and 96% of patients had no neurological deficit. Only 15% of the patients required surgery for their unstable fractures. Half of the patients attended outpatient follow -up appointments, all of whom underwent CT scanning of the cervical spine 9 months after the accident or operation.
CONCLUSIONS
The axis (C2) is the most commonly affected vertebra in cervical spine trauma, and odontoid fractures make up 50% of all C2 fractures. C2 fractures rarely cause any neurological deficit or vascular injury, and the majority of affected patients can be managed conservatively; only a small proportion requires surgical intervention. Surgical intervention leads to early and complete healing.
PubMed: 33560250
DOI: 10.14444/7139 -
Current Osteoporosis Reports Dec 2020We aimed to synthesize the recent work on the intra-vertebral heterogeneity in density, trabecular architecture and mechanical properties, its implications for fracture... (Review)
Review
PURPOSE OF REVIEW
We aimed to synthesize the recent work on the intra-vertebral heterogeneity in density, trabecular architecture and mechanical properties, its implications for fracture risk, its association with degeneration of the intervertebral discs, and its implications for implant design.
RECENT FINDINGS
As compared to the peripheral regions of the centrum, the central region of the vertebral body exhibits lower density and more sparse microstructure. As compared to the anterior region, the posterior region shows higher density. These variations are more pronounced in vertebrae from older persons and in those adjacent to degenerated discs. Mixed results have been reported in regard to variation along the superior-inferior axis and to relationships between the heterogeneity in density and vertebral strength and fracture risk. These discrepancies highlight that, first, despite the large amount of study of the intra-vertebral heterogeneity in microstructure, direct study of that in mechanical properties has lagged, and second, more measurements of vertebral loading are needed to understand how the heterogeneity affects distributions of stress and strain in the vertebra. These future areas of study are relevant not only to the question of spine fractures but also to the design and selection of implants for spine fusion and disc replacement. The intra-vertebral heterogeneity in microstructure and mechanical properties may be a product of mechanical adaptation as well as a key determinant of the ability of the vertebral body to withstand a given type of loading.
Topics: Adaptation, Physiological; Biomechanical Phenomena; Bone Density; Humans; Porosity; Spinal Fractures; Stress, Mechanical; Vertebral Body; Weight-Bearing
PubMed: 33215364
DOI: 10.1007/s11914-020-00640-0