RESUMEN
Congenital atlas abnormalities are rare and often asymptomatic findings, accidentally detected in trauma and, more rarely, in nontrauma patients. Rachischisis in both anterior and posterior atlas arches, condition defined as ''split atlas," is extremely uncommon and it may well be confused with fracture. Being able to discriminate between these 2 conditions is an essential step in patient care management. In this article, we report 2 cases of split atlas ascertained in both trauma and nontrauma patients. The first concerning a 54-year-old man fell from a 2 m scaffold, and the second related to a 25-year-old woman suffering from treatment-resistant headaches. Subsequently we proceed to analyse the embryology of these abnormalities, and later to discuss pitfalls, tips and tricks useful to a correct diagnosis, in order to achieve an accurate management of split atlas. Specifically, we outline the crucial radiological features to identify, that are beneficial to an efficient differential diagnosis between congenital atlas abnormalities and fracture. These include smooth corticated margins of the cleft, and <3 mm lateral displacement of C1 lateral masses.
RESUMEN
PURPOSE: To determine the prevalence, radiographic features and reporting rate of, and the association between the congenital anterior and posterior C1 arch anomalies. METHODS: The computed tomography (CT) images of the cervical spines of all patients over 18 years who had CT examinations in our hospital during the study period were reviewed to evaluate for congenital anomalies of the anterior and posterior C1 arches. Radiology reports of the corresponding CT examinations were reviewed to determine the reporting rate of these defects. RESULTS: Of 3273 subjects, 185 (5.65%) had congenital atlas anomalies: 169 isolated posterior (5.16%), 15 combined anterior and posterior (bipartite, 0.46%), and one isolated anterior (0.031%) arch defects. Females had a higher prevalence than males (7.46 versus 4.72%, P = 0.0013). Eighty-three cases (44.9%) of C1 arch anomalies were not reported. The Currarino type A, B, C and E posterior arch defects accounted for 81.6, 8.1, 1.1, and 0.5% of all arch anomalies while type D was not observed. Fifteen patients (0.46%) had combined anterior and posterior arch anomalies (bipartite atlas) versus only one with an isolated anterior C1 defect, indicating a significant association between the anterior and posterior arch defects (P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Although some types of congenital C1 arch anomalies are rare, type A defects are relatively common radiological findings that are unreported approximately 45% of the time. Based on the significant association between the anterior and posterior arch defects, we propose possible mechanisms for the formation of the bipartite atlas.
Asunto(s)
Atlas Cervical/anomalías , Enfermedades de la Columna Vertebral/epidemiología , Adulto , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Atlas Cervical/diagnóstico por imagen , Estudios Transversales , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Prevalencia , Estudios Retrospectivos , Enfermedades de la Columna Vertebral/congénito , Tomografía Computarizada por Rayos X/métodos , Adulto JovenRESUMEN
Congenital fusion of the atlas with the odontoid process of the axis is a very rare condition caused by a segmental defect of the first cervical somite. Only 9 such cases have been reported in the literature to date. The bipartite atlas, another well-documented rare anomaly, has been observed in only 0.1% of the general population. We describe the first case of a 70-year-old male with both of these complex congenital anomalies.
Asunto(s)
Atlas Cervical/anomalías , Apófisis Odontoides/anomalías , Enfermedades de la Columna Vertebral/congénito , Anciano , Humanos , Masculino , Enfermedades de la Columna Vertebral/diagnóstico por imagen , Tomografía Computarizada por Rayos XRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Congenital malformations of the posterior arch of the atlas are rare, occurring in 4% of the population. Anterior arch aplasia is extremely rare and often only coexists with posterior arch anomalies, resulting in a split or bipartite atlas. This congenital anomaly is believed to be present in only 0.1% of the population. CASE DESCRIPTION: A 19-year-old male collegiate football player presented with neck pain and upper extremity paresthesias after sustaining a tackle that forced neck hyperextension. Computed tomography revealed significant congenital bony anomalies of the cervical spine, with incomplete fusion of the anterior and posterior arches of the atlas; however, there was no evidence for of any acute traumatic injury or fracture. Magnetic resonance imaging revealed increased edema in pre-vertebral soft tissues around C1-C2, with a possible increase in signal within the fibrous ring of the anterior C1 ring. Flexion and extension imaging confirmed reduced range of motion and no instability. Patient was treated non-operatively, and was able to resume normal activity and training regimens, and continued to do well clinically. CONCLUSION: We describe a rare case of split or bipartite atlas in collegiate football athlete who sustained a neck injury during a tackle. The patient had no atlanto-axial instability or other clinical contraindications and was managed non-operatively, resuming full participation shortly thereafter with a full resolution of symptoms.