Surgical Approaches to the Cervicothoracic Junction

Published on 13/03/2015 by admin

Filed under Neurosurgery

Last modified 22/04/2025

Print this page

rate 1 star rate 2 star rate 3 star rate 4 star rate 5 star
Your rating: none, Average: 4 (1 votes)

This article have been viewed 3582 times

Chapter 191 Surgical Approaches to the Cervicothoracic Junction

Surgical treatment of spinal disorders at the cervicothoracic junction is challenging because of the complex anatomy and biomechanical properties of this region. Access to the cervicothoracic junction is complicated by important vascular, visceral, and soft-tissue structures, and knowledge of these structures and surgical landmarks is essential for decompression and stabilization.

Cervicothoracic pathologies are relatively uncommon but include bacterial and tuberculous infections, fractures from primary bone disease, primary bone tumors, meningeal tumors, vascular malformations, congenital connective tissue and skeletal disorders, trauma, and thoracic disc herniations (Table 191-1). Up to 15% of patients with spinal neoplasms have lesions of the upper thoracic vertebrae, and 10% of spinal metastases arise from the T1 to the T4 region.1 One group reported that 8% of patients undergoing tumor resection required posterior instrumentation at the cervicothoracic junction.2 Additionally, as many as 9% of traumatic injuries can involve the cervicothoracic junction.3

TABLE 191-1 Differential Diagnosis of Lesions of the Cervicothoracic Junction

Metastatic tumors
Primary tumors of bone
Primary lymphoma
Intradural, extramedullar tumors
Intradural, intramedullary tumors
Bacterial infections
Tuberculous infections
Vascular malformations
Pathologic fracture (primary metabolic disease of bone)
Connective tissue and skeletal disorders
Traumatic vertebral fractures
Disc herniations

Up to 80% of unstable cervicothoracic pathologies can have neurologic compromise, and many of these lesions require surgical treatment. Unfortunately, injuries to this area are often overlooked on routine radiographic studies.4,5 The surgical goals include neural decompression, immediate stabilization, restoration of anatomic spinal alignment, and early rehabilitation. Appropriate treatment is necessary because acute unstable lesions of the cervicothoracic junction can have severe consequences including poor rates of recovery and significant mortality from cardiopulmonary-related complications.6

Posterior approaches, such as laminectomy and pediculectomy, are common approaches to many diseases of the spine. When treating anterior spinal element diseases, these techniques might not be adequate, can have a higher complication rate, and can disrupt spinal stability.7,8 For these reasons, a variety of anterior and posterolateral surgical approaches have been developed.

The first detailed description of a posterolateral approach to the anterior elements was the costotransversectomy.9 Although this technique gave adequate exposure of the middle and lower thoracic spine, it was less useful in the upper thoracic region. In 1954, Capener10 described a more-extensive posterolateral exposure, the lateral rhachotomy. In 1976, Larson and colleagues11 reported a modification of the lateral rhachotomy, the lateral extracavitary approach, which provided improved exposure of the middle and lower thoracic spine with less morbidity. However, these new additions were still limited at the cervicothoracic junction owing to the shoulder girdle. The lateral parascapular extrapleural operation, a modification of the lateral extracavitary approach, eliminates those obstructions and provides exposure of the thoracic vertebrae up to the inferior end plate of C7.12

Purely anterior, supraclavicular approaches to the cervicothoracic junction were initially described by Jonnesco13 and Brunig14 in 1923 and later used by Royle15 for spastic paralysis, by Gask16 for Raynaud’s disease, and by Ochsner and DeBakey17 for thoracic sympathectomy. However, exposure of the thoracic area was restricted by the clavicle, so the transmanubrial and transclavicular approach was developed by Sundaresan and colleagues18 in 1984 and modified by Birch and colleagues19 in 1990.

Another approach to the anterior thoracic vertebral elements, the anterolateral thoracotomy, was first described by Hodgson and colleagues.20 This approach involves resection of the third rib and requires transpleural mobilization of the lung with ligation and division of the intercostal arteries, intercostal veins, and the hemiazygos vein.

The following sections discuss the clinical features of cervicothoracic junction diseases, including preoperative evaluation, anesthetic considerations, relevant regional surgical anatomy, biomechanics of the cervicothoracic junction, surgical approaches, and options for surgical reconstruction and stabilization.

Clinical Features

The differential diagnosis for cervicothoracic pathologies is listed in Table 191-1. Disease processes in this region can manifest as pain without neurologic deficit, thoracic myelopathy, C7 or T1 radiculopathy, or a combination of these signs and symptoms. Table 191-2 lists the presenting findings in our series of patients with pathologic processes of the cervicothoracic junction (C7 to T4).1 Of these patients, 93% had decreased sensation, 83% presented with generalized upper thoracic back pain, and 58% had leg weakness. C7 and T1 lesions were less common, and consequently, 33% of patients presented with radicular symptoms and 35% demonstrated hand weakness on examination. Other, less common findings included ataxia (25%) and bowel or bladder dysfunction (17%).

TABLE 191-2 Signs and Symptoms at Presentation of Patients with C7-T4 Pathologic Processes (17 Patients)

Signs and Symptoms Percentage of Patients with Signs or Symptoms
Back pain 83
Radicular pain 33
Leg weakness 58
Decreased sensation 92
Hand weakness 35
Bowel or bladder dysfunction 17
Ataxia 25
Babinski sign 58

Preoperative Evaluation

Radiographic Evaluation

Radiologic evaluation begins with anteroposterior and lateral plain radiographs, and evidence of pathology includes malalignment, vertebral collapse, and widening of the pedicles. These radiographs can demonstrate traumatic or pathologic vertebral fractures, infections, tumors, and deformities.

Infections such as osteomyelitis or discitis have a variety of characteristics on plain radiographs. The earliest and most consistent finding of infection is narrowing of the disc space, which is present in 74% of patients.21 After 3 to 6 weeks, destructive changes in the body can be noted, which usually begin as lytic areas in the anterior aspect of the body adjacent to the disc and end plate. Active bone formation and sclerosis is also present in 11% of patients.

Metastatic disease of the bone has several classic signs including unilateral erosion of a pedicle, fishmouthing (cephalad and caudad end plate concavity within the vertebral body), osteoblastic changes, and vertebral body collapse. These findings can occur late in the disease process because 30% to 70% of the bone must be destroyed before changes are visible on plain radiographs.22

Radionucleotide bone scintigraphy is a sensitive but not specific method for detecting metastatic disease and infections.23,24 However, false negatives have been reported with lung cancer, renal cell carcinoma, myeloproliferative diseases, and regional ischemia, and in patients with leukopenia.2527

Myelography is primarily used to evaluate the patency of the subarachnoid space. Thus, myelography can demonstrate the level of a metastatic lesion by indentation or complete blockage of the myelographic dye column as it flows through the spinal canal. Additionally, myelography can demonstrate the presence of intradural extramedullary or intramedullary tumors, disc herniations, retropulsed vertebral fragments from pathologic or traumatic fractures, and vascular malformations.

Computed tomography (CT) also aids in the evaluation of diseases of the thoracic spine. These pathologies include metastatic disease, intradural tumors, disc herniations, and vascular malformations. Additionally, CT aids in defining the extent of paraspinal soft-tissue involvement for tumor staging and surgical planning, and also helps determine the extent of bone destruction. In addition, CT scans can help distinguish between osteoporosis and tumor as a cause of vertebral body collapse.

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is the most important diagnostic tool for evaluating diseases of the thoracic spine. MRI permits early diagnosis of infection and recognition of paravertebral or intraspinal abscesses without the risk associated with myelography.28 MRI is also effective in demonstrating the extent of metastatic disease, primary tumors of bone, primary lymphoma, intradural tumors, thoracic disc herniations, and vertebral fractures. Additionally, this modality may be helpful in spinal vascular malformations, and when assessing metastatic disease, MRI has been found to be at least as sensitive and accurate as gallium and bone scanning combined.29 Finally, MRI provides anatomic detail, especially of soft tissue and nervous structures, not available with any other imaging studies.

Approach-Related Surgical Anatomy

Lateral Parascapular Extrapleural Approach and Anterolateral Thoracotomy Approach

The lateral parascapular extrapleural approach is a posterolateral surgery that allows nearly lateral access to the cervicothoracic junction vertebral bodies. The anterolateral thoracotomy is a transthoracic approach through the third rib that allows access to the anterior and lateral aspects of the vertebrae and for control of the mediastinal vasculature. The relevant anatomy may be summarized in three major areas: scapula and parascapular anatomy, posterior thoracic cage, and retromediastinal space and spinal anatomy.

Scapular and Parascapular Anatomy

Posterolateral access to the thoracic cage and vertebral elements is hindered by the scapular and the parascapular shoulder musculature (Fig. 191-1). Mobilization of the scapula anterolaterally is necessary and requires the disruption of the posteromedial shoulder musculature.

The first muscle encountered after skin incision is the trapezius muscle, which inserts medially at the superior nuchal line and external occipital protuberance and at the spinous processes of C1 through T12. This muscle extends laterally as the upper, intermediate, and lower divisions to the lateral third of the clavicle, the acromion, and the scapular spine. The trapezius muscle stabilizes and abducts the shoulder by the insertion of the lower fiber aponeurosis to the tubercle of the lower lip of the scapular spine. The trapezius muscle is innervated by the ventral rami of C3 and C4 of the spinal accessory nerve, which lies deep to the trapezius muscle and superficial to the levator scapulae. The arterial supply is from branches of the dorsal scapular artery.

The rhomboid major, rhomboid minor, and levator scapulae muscles are deep to the trapezius muscle. The ligamentum nuchae of the spinous processes provides the insertion site for the rhomboid major (T1 to T4) and the rhomboid minor (C6 to C7). Similarly, both of these muscles insert along the vertebral edge of the scapula: the rhomboid minor above and the rhomboid major below the scapular spine. The dorsal scapular artery supplies all three muscles, and the dorsal scapular nerve innervates the rhomboids. The levator scapulae muscle is innervated via branches from C3, C4, and C5. Both the artery and nerve lie deep to the muscle bodies, are located medially under the scapula, and are rarely seen during a routine exposure. The serratus posterior superior muscle lies deep to the trapezius muscle from C6 through T2, and the splenius arises ventral to this muscle at the ligamentum nuchae and upper thoracic spine, dividing into the splenius capitis and splenius cervicis. The splenius capitis inserts on the superior nuchal line and mastoid process, and the splenius cervicis joins the levator scapulae to insert on the transverse processes of C1 through C4. These muscles stabilize and rotate the skull.

During exposure of the cervicothoracic junction, the spinous process insertions of the trapezius, rhomboid, serratus posterior superior, splenius capitis, and splenius cervicis are laterally retracted as a single group. As these muscles are taken down, the scapula can be rotated anterolaterally out of the operative field. This maneuver exposes the posterior and posterolateral rib cage.

Posterior Thoracic Cage

The deep or intrinsic muscles including the erector spinae and transversospinalis muscles are next encountered (Fig. 191-2). The erector spinae muscles originate from the sacrum as a dense aponeurotic band and divide into three columns below the last rib as they proceed superiorly. The iliocostalis muscle is located laterally and inserts from the angles of the ribs and into the cervical transverse processes from C4 through C6 as series of related muscular bundles. Each bundle extends over approximately six segments, with the more medial bundles extending more cephalad.

The longissimus muscles (thoracis, cervicis, and capitis) insert into the lumbar and thoracic transverse processes and ribs between T2 and T12. Medially, the muscle bundles extend from T1 through T4 to the transverse processes of C2 through C6. Medial to the cervical insertions, other bundles extend superiorly to the mastoid process deep to the splenius capitis and sternocleidomastoid muscles. Thus, the longissimus is the only erector spinae muscle to reach the skull. Finally, the aponeurotic spinalis muscle extends from the upper lumbar to the lower cervical spinous processes.

The transversospinalis muscle group passes cephalad from the transverse processes to the spinous processes immediately deep to the erector spinae muscles in three layers. The most superficial layer, the semispinalis, arises from the tips of the transverse processes and inserts at the tips of the spinous processes approximately five vertebral levels cephalad. At the cervicothoracic junction, this muscle is primarily composed of the semispinalis capitis. This muscle passes from the upper thoracic transverse processes and lower cervical articular processes (C4 to T4) to the occipital bone between the superior and inferior nuchal lines. The muscle fibers run vertically and attach to the ligamentum nuchae. The intermediate layer, the multifidus, originates from the erector spinae aponeurosis and from the transverse processes up to C4 and extends to the lower border of each spinous process. This muscle spans approximately three levels. The deepest muscles of this group, the rotatores, are muscles that bridge one interspace. They pass from one transverse process root to the spinous process root immediately above.

These muscle groups extend the vertebral column or can bend and rotate the vertebrae. The erector spinae and transversospinalis muscles are typically dissected off the spinous processes, laminae, facets, and transverse processes as a single muscular mass. This dissection exposes all the vertebral elements from the spinous processes to the transverse processes, as well as the costotransverse ligaments, joints, and ribs.

Each rib articulates with its own vertebral body and transverse process, the vertebra above, and the intervertebral disc between them (Fig. 191-3), but the first rib articulates only with its own vertebral body. Each of these articulations forms separate synovial joints, and the joints of the posterolateral vertebral body surface are separated by an intra-articular ligament that attaches to the intervertebral disc. An articular capsule surrounds the joints and attaches to the vertebral body anteriorly via the radiate ligament.

The costotransverse joint is surrounded by an articular capsule and is strengthened laterally by the lateral costotransverse ligament and the costotransverse ligament. The superior costotransverse ligament joins the neck of the rib to the transverse process immediately above. The canal formed between this ligament and the vertebral column contains the dorsal ramus of the spinal nerve and the dorsal branch of the intercostal artery. Finally, the ribs are attached to one another through the intercostal musculature, which originates medially on the superior rib and inserts laterally on the inferior rib.

The intercostal musculature contains the intercostal nerve, artery, and vein as they pass between the internal intercostal membrane and the pleura and between the internal and innermost intercostal muscles. Most commonly, the intercostal vein is cephalad and the intercostal artery is more caudad. The intercostal nerve may be separate from these structures and is located most caudad. The pleura lies ventral to the intercostal bundle and the intercostal muscles.

Retromediastinal Space and Spinal Anatomy

By dissecting away the pleura, the lateral vertebral elements are exposed. The neural foramen follows the intercostal bundle medially and contains the dorsal root ganglion, as well as the gray and white rami communicantes, which course ventrally to the sympathetic chain and ganglia. The sympathetic chain is within a fascial compartment formed by the fusion of the mediastinal and prevertebral fascia over the costovertebral articulation.

The first two intercostal spaces are supplied by branches of the costocervical trunk from the highest intercostal artery. This artery descends anteriorly along the necks of the first two ribs to the ventral rami of the eighth cervical and first thoracic nerves. The remaining intercostal arteries arise from the posterior surface of the thoracic aorta. The first four of these arteries ascend to the third through six intercostal spaces and become the intercostal arteries. Each intercostal artery runs obliquely across the vertebral body from caudad to cephalad with the periosteum. These arteries are located deep to the azygos or hemiazygos vein, the thoracic duct, and the sympathetic trunk.

The major portion of the first thoracic ventral ramus passes cephalad across the neck of the first rib to join the eighth cervical nerve in the brachial plexus. A small intercostal branch runs across the inferior surface of the first rib and enters the first interspace close to the costal cartilage. The ventral ramus of the second thoracic nerve can also send a branch to the brachial plexus. If this branch is large, the lateral cutaneous branch of the second intercostal nerve is small or absent. Although the intercostal nerves below T1 can usually be ligated to facilitate exposure, C7 and T1 cannot be sacrificed without causing significant hand dysfunction.

Transmanubrial Approach

The transmanubrial approach is an anterior approach that allows direct access to the vertebral bodies and associated pathologies. This approach consists of three major steps: the thoracic inlet, the visceral and vascular compartments of the superior mediastinum, and the retromediastinal space.

Vascular and Visceral Compartments of the Superior Mediastinum

The visceral compartment is contained within the visceral fascia and consists of the trachea, esophagus, and thyroid gland. The neurovascular compartment is surrounded by the carotid sheath and contains the carotid arterial system, internal jugular vein, and vagus nerve. These compartments create a potential space, the viscerocarotid space, which extends from the base of the skull to C7–T4. The inferior extent of this space depends on the location of fusion between the visceral and alar fascia.

In the upper thorax, the visceral compartment continues down to the bronchi, where the fascia fuses with the visceral and parietal pleurae. Between the visceral and parietal pleurae exists a potential intrapleural space. The carotid sheath extends inferiorly to the subclavian vessels, where it fuses into the axillary sheath. In the superior mediastinum, the vascular compartment is defined by multiple surrounding fascial layers. These fasciae include the transthoracic fascia ventrally, the prevertebral fascial extension dorsally, visceral fascia caudally, the parietal pleurae laterally, and the pericardium inferiorly.

The venous structures consist of the brachiocephalic veins and branches. These veins descend from the neck into the superior mediastinum just posterior to the thymus gland or its remnants. The right brachiocephalic vein is formed posterior to the medial end of the right clavicle and descends vertically into the superior mediastinum. The left brachiocephalic vein is formed posterior to the medial end of the left clavicle and descends diagonally to join the right brachiocephalic vein posterior to the right first costal cartilage. These veins become the superior vena cava. Tributaries draining into the brachiocephalic veins include the vertebral and first posterior intercostal veins in the neck and the internal thoracic, thymic, and inferior thyroid veins in the superior mediastinum. On the left, the superior intercostal vein (which drains the second and third intercostal spaces) also joins the left brachiocephalic vein.

The arterial structures consist of the aortic arch, brachiocephalic artery, left common carotid artery, and left subclavian arteries and their branches. The aortic arch initially ascends posterior to the superior vena cava, then turns inferiorly as it passes anterior and to the left of the vertebral column. A second concave turn occurs as the arch curves around the anterolateral visceral compartment to reach the vertebral column.

The brachiocephalic artery is the first branch off of the aortic arch. This artery ascends vertically and to the right, dividing into the right common carotid and subclavian arteries posterior to the right sternoclavicular joint. The second aortic branch, the left common carotid artery, ascends vertically into the carotid sheath. The left subclavian artery is the third branch, and this artery ascends superiorly and to the left, curving around the thoracic inlet and into the axillary sheath. Neither of these arteries branch in the superior mediastinum.

As previously described, the carotid sheath contains the carotid arterial system, the internal jugular vein, and vagus nerve, and the visceral fascia contains the esophagus and trachea. Between these two adjacent compartments lies the viscerocarotid space. Blunt dissection of this space exposes the alar fascia and the retropharyngeal space. In the superior mediastinum, the left brachiocephalic vein runs obliquely and superiorly from left to right. Caudally, the operative field is limited by the aortic arch and its branches at the T3 and T4 vertebrae. Additionally, the right recurrent laryngeal nerve and the lymphatics terminating in the thoracic duct can cross the retropharyngeal and retromediastinal space between C7 and T3. The left recurrent laryngeal nerve branches off the vagus in the superior mediastinum, loops around the ligamentum arteriosum, and ascends within the visceral fascia between the esophagus and trachea.

In the superior mediastinum, the thoracic duct runs dorsal and to the left of the esophagus between the visceral and alar fascia. The duct ascends to the C7 level, where it lies laterally and dorsally to the carotid sheath. It then courses caudally and ventrally to the branches of the thyrocervical trunk and phrenic nerve, terminating at the junction of the left internal jugular and subclavian veins. A right lymphatic trunk follows a similar course to the thoracic duct.

Cervicothoracic Biomechanics

The cervicothoracic junction extends from C7 through T4 and includes the lower brachial plexus, the thoracic outlet, and the superior mediastinum. This region also has a narrow spinal canal and narrow pedicles, and it represents a transition from the lateral masses of the cervical vertebra to the transverse processes of the thoracic spine. The structures affecting spinal stability include the vertebral bodies and intervertebral discs, anterior and posterior longitudinal ligaments, and the interarticulating facet joints and ligamentous complex posteriorly.

The cervicothoracic junction is exposed to significant forces, particularly in flexion and distraction. The anterior elements are the primary structures that transfer compressive forces between the adjacent vertebral bodies. The posterior spinal components have little weight-bearing function but are important for the attachment of supporting ligaments and resistance to the extremes of motion. The anterior and posterior longitudinal ligaments prevent extreme flexion and extension, whereas the intertransverse and capsular ligaments inhibit lateral bending and axial rotation.

The rib cage and its sternal articulations also increase thoracic spine stability. Additionally, biomechanical studies have shown that the costotransverse joints and rib cage play a significant role in lateral bending and axial rotation.30 Berg31 describes the sternal rib complex as the fourth spinal column. At the cervicothoracic junction, disruption to any two spinal columns is unstable and should be treated accordingly.

Trauma, degenerative processes, infection, and neoplastic involvement can alter the biomechanical function of this area and can predispose the cervicothoracic junction to instability. The transition from the mobile, lordotic cervical spine to the rigid, kyphotic thoracic spine exposes this region to unique stress as the transfer of weight occurs between spinal columns.32,33 This stress is amplified by the decrease in vertebral index from C6 to T1.34

Cervicothoracic surgeries can destabilize the region, leading to kyphosis and spinal cord compression. Several authors have reported increasing spinal deformity caused by a previous cervicothoracic junction laminectomy.5,35,36 Spinal fusions ending at the cervicothoracic junction can also be a contributing factor to iatrogenic instability.37 In a series by Steinmetz and colleagues, factors that contributed to fusion failure included laminectomy without instrumentation, multilevel corpectomies, previous cervical surgery, smoking, and deformity correction.38 The increased incidence of neurologic injury may also be related to the smaller spinal canal size and tenuous blood supply.4,5

Few studies have addressed the biomechanics and stability of fixation at the cervicothoracic junction, and the majority of biomechanical studies in this region have focused on the cervical spine.39,40 Biomechanical tests on cervical cadaveric spines have shown superior stability of posterior screw fixation techniques as compared with anterior fixation.41,42 In addition, posterior wiring techniques were found to be inferior to the intact condition and performed poorly in movements other than flexion.41,43 In extension and torsion, lateral mass screws and plating devices provide increased stability relative to posterior wiring alone.44

Biomechanically, transpedicular screw fixation of the lower cervical spine provides the most stability to the unstable cervical segment. Rhee and colleagues demonstrated that C7 pedicle screws were superior to lateral mass screw and wiring techniques, and other studies have shown the importance of increasing screw length as measured by testing of in-line screw pullout strength.4547 These findings must be weighed against a high rate of pedicle violation with pedicle screw placement in the lower cervical spine. 48 Rhee and colleagues also demonstrated that if C7 pedicle screws were not possible, then C6 and C7 lateral mass fixation was necessary to provide similar stability.47

Bueff and colleagues49 compared three different fixation devices at the cervicothoracic junction following a simulated C7–T1 distractive-flexion injury: an anterior plate, a posterior plate, and a posterior hook-and-rod system. This study showed that the hook-and-rod system provided as much as six times the stiffness of the intact spine, whereas the anterior plate provided stiffness similar to that of the intact condition. Clinically, standalone anterior fixation at the cervicothoracic junction can lead to a high failure rate.50

Vaccaro and colleagues51 examined the use of a novel plate-and-rod construct for the cervicothoracic junction and concluded that their device supported the maximal loading conditions of the native cervical spine. Kreshak and colleagues examined the mean stiffness of three different posterior cervicothoracic fixation systems after a two- or three-column injury.52 These systems included one plate-and-screw system and two rod-and-screw systems. Following a two-column injury, all three constructs were able to stabilize the cervicothoracic junction in flexion and extension, lateral bending, and axial rotation. After a three-column injury, all three systems failed to provide adequate stability, especially in extension. These results suggest that additional anterior stabilization may be needed when a three-column injury occurs at the cervicothoracic junction.

A biomechanical study by O’Brien and colleagues raised the possibility of posterior-only fixation to treat a three-column injury at the cervicothoracic junction. These investigators used two-level fixation above and below the level of injury, with the addition of two cross-linking connectors to their construct.42 It is worth noting that their injury model did not involve damage to the vertebral body. However, combined anterior and posterior instrumentation for three-column injuries was supported by the biomechnical work of Prybis and colleagues. These authors demonstrated instability with posterior-only constructs and significantly improved stability with the addition of anterior fixation with or without corpectomy.53 This study also showed a trend toward decreased flexibility with increasing levels of thoracic instrumentation.

Choice of Surgical Approach

The choice of surgery depends on the location of the pathologic process. Surgical approaches to the cervicothoracic junction can be divided into four categories: anterior transcervical approaches (supraclavicular, transclavicular/transmanubrial, trans-sternal), anterolateral transthoracic approach, posterolateral approaches (costotransversectomy, lateral extracavitary, lateral parascapular extrapleural), and posterior approaches (laminectomy, transpedicular). The posterior approaches provide limited anterior column exposure and can cause further instability without adequate fixation, and they can also be associated with higher rates of neurologic morbidity.

In patients with long, thin necks, a supraclavicular approach to T2 is possible, but the angle of approach and thoracic kyphosis might not provide the optimal view for decompression and stabilization. The transmanubrial approach exposes the vertebral bodies anteriorly and allows excellent exposure of the lower cervical vertebrae as well as T1, T2, and possibly T3. To obtain a T4 exposure, dissection of the superior mediastinal vascular compartment is required, and often, the left brachiocephalic vein, subclavian veins, aortic arch, and great vessels are encountered. This approach also carries the risk of injury to the carotid sheath structures, trachea, esophagus, recurrent laryngeal nerves, aortic arch and its branches, vertebral arteries, brachiocephalic and subclavian veins, sympathetic trunk and stellate ganglion, spinal cord, and pleural apices. The transmanubrial approach offers the simultaneous exposure of the cervical and the upper thoracic spine, but the thecal sac is not visualized before performing a corpectomy. Additionally, posterior stabilization cannot be performed without repositioning the patient in the operating room.

The anterolateral transthoracic approach exposes the vertebral bodies anterolaterally after mobilization of the scapula and dissection of the intrapleural space to the level of the paramedian compartment of the retromediastinal space. With this approach, exposure of T3 and T4 can be achieved, but access to T1 and T2 is limited by the narrowing of the thoracic inlet. Additionally, the lower cervical vertebrae are not accessible. Potential risks include injury to the shoulder neurovascular supply, lungs, superior mediastinal structures (aorta and its branches, trachea, esophagus, thoracic duct), sympathetic trunk and stellate ganglion, lower trunk and posterior cord of the brachial plexus, and the intercostal, long thoracic, and thoracodorsal nerves. Other disadvantages include the need for transmuscular mobilization of the scapula and intrapleural dissection, as well as the significant depth of operative field. However, this approach allows exposure of the anterior spinal elements and control of the intercostal segmental arteries.

The lateral parascapular extrapleural approach is an extended posterolateral approach that allows direct lateral exposure of the vertebral bodies. In this approach, the thoracoscapular space is dissected after anatomic mobilization of the scapula, and the paraspinal musculature is mobilized to open directly into the paramedian compartment of the retromediastinal space. Subsequent exposure of the T1 to T4 vertebral bodies and the inferior portion of C7 under the T1 nerve root is possible. Relative advantages include decompression of neural tissue under direct visualization, a completely extrapleural dissection, simultaneous exposure of C7 through T4, and the ability to place posterior instrumentation through the same incision and position. Potential risks include injury to the dorsomedial parascapular musculature, pleura and lungs, superior mediastinal structures, sympathetic trunk and stellate ganglion, and spinal cord. Additionally, this approach requires a more tedious paraspinal muscle dissection, does not allow the exposure of any cervical vertebrae beyond C7, and can lead to significant muscle atrophy. In selected patients, adequate exposure can be obtained via a traditional costotransversectomy or lateral extracavitary approach.

Kaya and colleagues presented 17 patients who were treated for trauma or pathologic lesions of the cervicothoracic junction and outlined their methods for determining which approach to use. Their system accounts for the type of injury, the level of the lesion, and the time of admission. These authors selected an anterior approach for all pathologies involving the vertebral body and anterior structures and reserved posterior approaches for flexion–dislocation injuries without ventral involvement. The level of the lesion determined the particular anterior exposure, with the supramanubrial approach being used for access to T1, the transmanubrial approach for T2 and T3, and the lateral transthoracic for T3 and below. For patients whose lesions were diagnosed later than 1 month after the initial injury, a combined anterior-posterior approach was needed.54

Surgical Techniques

Lateral Parascapular Extrapleural Approach

The posterior neck and back from the nuchal line to the sacrum is prepared and draped in standard fashion. The incision begins in the midline three spinous processes above the intended surgical area and continues to three spinous processes below before curving gently to the surgical side of approach. The skin, trapezius muscle, and rhomboid muscles are reflected as a myocutaneous flap toward the medial border of the scapula by developing a plane between these muscles and the paraspinal muscles at the spinous processes (Fig. 191-4). The inferior trapezius fibers are transected to reflect this flap, and an identifiable muscle cuff is left for reapproximation.

At the cervical level, dissection of the levator scapulae muscles also improves exposure of the cervicothoracic junction. This added visualization is achieved by mobilization of the myocutaneous flap and the scapula laterally to expose the lower cervical region, upper dorsal rib cage region, and dorsal vertebral elements.

The deep cervical fascia and thoracolumbar fascia cover the splenius and erector spinae muscles. These muscles may be retracted medially to the contralateral side by dissecting from the spinous processes and dorsal spinal elements, allowing visualization of the dorsal rib cage and vertebral elements from the tip of the spinous process to the transverse process.

The neurovascular bundles and intercostal muscles are freed from the ribs via subperiosteal dissection, and subsequently the costotransverse and costovertebral ligaments are incised to facilitate the removal of the costovertebral tip to the posterior bend of each rib. This resection contrasts with the 3 cm removal in the standard costotransversectomy approach or the 5 cm removal in the lateral extracavitary approach. Following this dissection, the intercostal neurovascular bundles are dissected from the intercostal muscles, and the intercostal arteries are ligated and transected. The intercostal nerves are retracted to expose the intervertebral disc, but these nerves must be sacrificed proximal to the dorsal root ganglia to resect the vertebral body. As described previously, nerve roots cephalad to T2 should be preserved to maintain hand function.

The intercostal nerve can be followed to the vertebral foramen, and the sympathetic chain can then be identified on the lateral vertebral surface. The rami communicantes are then transected, and the sympathetic chain is displaced anterolaterally to expose the vertebral body, pedicle, and foramen. At the level of the intercostal nerve, the transverse process, lamina, and pedicles are removed with a high-speed drill or Kerrison punch to expose the lateral thecal sac. A corpectomy can then be performed using either a high-speed drill or curet with preservation of the anterior and posterior longitudinal ligament to protect the thecal sac and superior mediastinal structures (Fig. 191-5). Vertebral reconstruction is performed using a rib graft or fibular allograft strut. If the pathologic process is malignant, Steinmann pins and methyl methacrylate are used. Alternatively, a metal cage with autologous bone may be used for vertebral body reconstruction. Appropriate posterior spinal fixation is then performed.

Before wound closure, the operative field is filled with saline to check for evidence of an air leak. If an air leak is present, a small (22 or 24 Fr) chest tube is placed into the wound and brought out through a separate stab incision below the primary incision. Two Hemovac drains are then placed, and a layered wound closure is performed.

Anterolateral Transthoracic Approach

For the anterolateral transthoracic approach, the patient is placed in the lateral decubitus position. The skin is incised from the paraspinous area of T1 to the seventh rib along the medial border of the scapula. This incision is continued laterally, anteriorly, and then medially to the costal cartilage of the third rib (Fig. 191-6). The trapezius, latissimus dorsi, rhomboid major, and serratus posterior muscles are divided to identify the third rib. This identification is aided by locating the attachment of the scalenus anterior or medius muscles on the second rib. The scapula is retracted cephalad and medially using a scapular retractor, and the third rib is resected from its angle to the costal cartilage. The chest spreader can be inserted and opened, exposing the pleura and underlying lungs, aorta, and spine.

The parietal pleura is incised from the costochondral cartilage to the midvertebral body. The lung is deflated and retracted to expose the spine (Fig. 191-7). The pleura is incised cephalad and caudad to expose the pathologic vertebrae and the intervertebral discs, as well as the intercostal arteries and veins that lie over the midvertebral body. The appropriate intercostal arteries and veins are dissected, ligated, and cut prior to vertebrectomy.

After vertebrectomy and reconstruction, a chest tube on water seal is placed. The pleura is then sutured closed, and the ribs are reapproximated with wire. Each muscle layer is independently reapproximated using 0 polyglycolic acid (Vicryl) sutures. Subcutaneous 2-0 polyglycolic sutures and skin staples are then used to close the wound.

Transmanubrial and Transclavicular Approach

The patient is positioned supine with the head turned slightly to the side contralateral to the approach. An incision is made 2 cm above the clavicle from the contralateral sternocleidomastoid to 2 to 3 cm lateral to the ipsilateral sternocleidomastoid (Fig. 191-8). A T incision is then created in the midline, extending to the midpoint of the sternal body. This incision may also be modified depending on the patient’s specific anatomy and pathology (Fig. 191-9). The platysma muscle is divided and mobilized cephalad and caudad, and the external jugular vein is divided. The supraclavicular nerves should be identified and protected as much as possible, but the medial branches are often sacrificed.

The sternocleidomastoid muscle is identified and dissected from the deeper structures. The pectoralis major muscle is also identified and separated from the medial half of the clavicle and the manubrium. The superficial and middle layers of the deep cervical fascia are dissected to allow the reflection of the sternocleidomastoid, sternohyoid, and sternothyroid muscles from the manubrium and clavicle without damaging their neurovascular supply.

The suprasternal space of Burns (a suprasternal midline space created by a leaflet split in the superficial layer of deep fascia) is opened while leaving the periosteum and anterior transthoracic fascia for protection of the brachiocephalic veins. Next, the omohyoid muscle is marked and divided prior to identifying the internal jugular vein and common carotid artery.

A high-speed drill is used to cut the ipsilateral two thirds of the manubrium, and the first costal cartilage is divided while leaving the clavicular manubrial joint intact. The clavicle is divided after drilling holes for the eventual application of a fixation plate. The manubrium, sternoclavicular joint, and medial half of the clavicle are elevated on the pedicle of the sternocleidomastoid muscle. This elevation exposes the infrahyoid muscles, trachea, brachiocephalic veins and tributaries, brachiocephalic artery and branches, subclavian and common carotid arteries, scalenus anterior muscle, phrenic nerve, brachial plexus, and first rib.

The alar and mediastinal fascia are exposed via blunt dissection medial to the carotid sheath, and incision of these fasciae exposes the retromediastinal space and the prevertebral fascia covering the vertebral bodies and longus colli muscles (Fig. 191-10). Retractors are placed, and the pathologic process can be removed via curettage and suction or via a high-speed drill and Kerrison punch.

Following decompression of the spinal cord, reconstruction is begun using either autologous or allograft bone (tricortical iliac crest or fibula) or by synthetic implant (Fig. 191-11). After bony reconstruction, stabilization is achieved by an anterior plate screwed to the intact vertebrae above and below the pathologic levels or by placement in a halo brace.

The wound is then closed in layers over vacuum drainage. If the pleura is opened, a chest tube is inserted through a separate stab incision and connected to an underwater seal. The osteomuscular flap is then returned to its appropriate position. The manubrium is reattached using wires, and the clavicle is reattached using a plate and screws.

Variations have been reported in an attempt to reduce the sternal and clavicular dissection. Liu and colleagues reported the “trans–upper sternal approach,” which involves splitting the sternum to a point 2 cm distal to the sternal angle followed by cutting the two parts of the sternum transversely between the second and third rib.55 This procedure does not involve disruption of the clavicle. Pointillart and colleagues reported resection of lesions to T1–2 without resection of the sternum and to T5 with removal of a portion of the manubrium without violating the sternoclavicular joints.56 Teng and colleagues also described a preoperative method for determining the type of surgery based on the cervicothoracic angle (an angle formed between the axial plane of the suprasternal notch and the C7–T1 intervertebral disc). Lesions within this region were treated with the suprasternal approach, with occasional need for sternal splitting.57

Reconstruction and Stabilization

Operations at the cervicothoracic junction often require reconstruction and spinal stabilization because this region experiences significant biomechanical forces caused by the transition from the mobile, lordotic cervical spine to the fixed, kyphotic thoracic segment. Anterior reconstruction and stabilization techniques resemble that of the midcervical spine, but special anatomic issues arise for posterior instrumented fixation. A wide variety of options for instrumented constructs currently exist, with frequent new developments (Table 191-3).

TABLE 191-3 Options for Reconstruction and Stabilization

Anterior Posterior
Structural Graft
Iliac crest autograft Iliac crest autograft
Rib Laminectomy bone
Fibular allograft  
Vascularized fibular autograft  
Methyl methacrylate  
Instrumentation
Anterior cervical plate Interspinous wires
Harms cage Luque rectangle/sublaminar wires
Steinmann methyl methacrylate pins Pediatric CD hooks and rods
  AO plates/lateral mass or pedicle screws

AO, Arbeitsgemeinschaft Osteosynthese; CD, Cotrel-Dubousset.

Anterior Reconstruction

After an anterior approach, a substantial construct is required to bear the axial loads exerted on the anterior and middle columns. In tumor patients with a short life expectancy, it is frequently unnecessary and unlikely to achieve a solid bone fusion owing to the inhibition of bone growth from radiation and chemotherapy. The rapid creation and immediate stability of a methyl methacrylate construct with vertically embedded Steinmann pins is a reasonable option in these cases.

Bony fusion is desirable for trauma, infection, degenerative disease, and benign tumors. Most neurosurgeons have experience with anterior cervical stabilization, and following the approach, anterior cervicothoracic fusions are not significantly different. Fibular strut grafts or iliac crest autografts supplemented with an anterior cervical plate and screws provide excellent structural results but require a straight anterior approach (Fig. 191-12).

A Harms cage packed with autograft is another option for anterior support and eventual fusion, and recent additions of expandable cages and metal spacers can help facilitate reconstruction. Also, the use of free vascularized fibular strut grafts has been increasingly reported, particularly in correcting deformities.58

Posterior Stabilization

Posterior cervicothoracic instrumentation ranges from a simple tension band to complex hook, rod, and screw constructs. Because the cervicothoracic junction is under significant biomechanical stress, surgical fixation should incorporate several segments above and below the level of injury (Fig. 191-13). Tension bands resist flexion and distraction and can be used for pure ligamentous disruption. These tension bands are usually interspinous wiring, which can exert significant resistive forces and are simple, safe, fast, and a useful adjunct to other techniques.

Standalone anterior constructs have been reported to fail more commonly than posterior instrumentation, which affirms the mechanical advantage of posterior instrumentation.1 O’Brien and colleagues used two-column injury models to demonstrate the feasibility of biomechanical stabilization from posterior instrumentation alone.42

The Luque rectangle with sublaminar wires or Songer cables was a mainstay of internal fixation at the cervicothoracic junction. This relatively rigid construct combines segmental fixation with resistance to flexion, torsion, and some translation. This technique requires intact and healthy posterior elements and carries the risk of spinal cord injury with passage of the sublaminar wires. The construct should cover at least two levels above and two below the region of instability. However, recent biomechanical data demonstrate that posterior wiring might not increase stability when a lateral mass or pedicle screw construct has been used.47

Pediatric Cotrel-Dubousset systems with laminar hooks and rods have been applied at the cervicothoracic junction (Fig. 191-14). This construct is stable, but it requires intact posterior elements at the points of fixation and may be limited by the narrow cervicothoracic spinal canal.

Other options exist when the posterior elements have been disrupted by trauma or have been removed surgically. Beginning with the lateral mass plates of Roy-Camille and colleagues,59 new plate-and-rod–based fixation methods have emerged.60 Some additions include minipolyaxial screws, dual-diameter rods, cervical cross-links, and interconnectors. Current stabilization techniques require experience with cervical lateral mass or pedicle screw placement, upper and lower thoracic pedicle screw placement, and thoracic transverse process, pedicle, and laminar hooks. When the lamina are intact, sublaminar wiring techniques can add to the construct’s stability and are especially useful in the cervical area where screw pullout can often occur. Also, quadrilateral stability can be achieved by using two cross-links. Placentonakis and colleagues demonstrated the evolution of posterior instrumentation techniques in tumor surgery from sublaminar hook-and-rod constructs to lateral mass and pedicle screw constructs with improved stabilization.2

An understanding of the anatomy of the cervicothoracic junction is required for appropriate instrumentation, and anatomic variations are common. In general, the lower cervical laminae are thinner and weaker than the upper thoracic laminae, and the narrow spinal canal often limits the use of hook-and-rod stabilization.

At C7, the vertebral artery is on average 18 mm from midline and 17 mm from the posterior cortex of the lateral mass.61 Vertebral artery injury can occur if a lateral mass screw is too long or is directed less than 14 degrees laterally from the midpoint of the lateral mass of C7. At T1, the vertebral artery is 22 mm from the midline and 22 mm from the posterior cortex of the transverse process. These relationships can change with significant kyphotic or scoliotic deformity and can increase the risk of injury. Additionally, a caudally placed lateral mass screw can lead to spinal nerve injury.

At C7, the facet and lateral mass is thinner and can provide inadequate screw purchase, and as a result, lateral mass plating might not produce a biomechanically stable construct at the cervicothoracic junction. Pedicle screw constructs, however, have shown excellent biomechanical stability in this region (Fig. 191-15).

A number of studies have reported the unique anatomic constraints of the cervicothoracic pedicles. An and colleagues62 found it difficult to determine pedicle alignment in a cadaveric study. Stanescu and colleagues63 and Panjabi and coworkers64 both found highly variable pedicle dimensions and angles in the lower cervical and upper thoracic spine. This work has shown that the mean pedicle width increases from 5 mm at C5 to 8 mm at T1 and then decreases again to 4.5 mm at T5. Based on these data, the pedicles at C7, T1, and T2 are often large enough to permit placement of a 3.5-mm screw.

Karaikovic and colleagues65 studied 53 European-American cervical spines and found outer pedicle widths equal to or smaller than 4 mm in 13.2% of C5 and C6 and 6.6% of C7 pedicles. Miller and coworkers66 used the technique of Jeanneret and colleagues67 to attempt 3-mm pedicle screws in cadaveric cervical spines blindly or with a small laminotomy. They found potentially dangerous violations of the pedicle in 10 of 38 blinded placements and one of 40 placements after the advent of a laminotomy. In the thoracic spine, this group compared the Roy-Camille technique with the open lamina technique. They found grade II and III pedicle violations in 48 of 95 screws and 10 of 94 screws, respectively. In general, the T3 to T5 levels often have small, narrow pedicles that make screw placement challenging, often necessitating the use of thoracic hooks.

The medial inclination and variation in pedicle angle, as well as changes in pedicle length and proximity to the exiting superior and inferior nerve roots, are other factors that make safe screw placement difficult in the cervicothoracic region. The pedicle angle decreases from 50 degrees medially at C5 to 11 degrees medially at T5, and the pedicle length increases gradually from C5 to T5. The mean distance of the spinal nerve to the superior and inferior pedicles ranged between 0.8 and 2.3 mm. Because a greater separation exists between the nerve and the superior pedicle, a screw violation of the superior cortex can place the nerve at higher risk.

Despite anatomic concerns, cervicothoracic pedicle screws have been successfully employed in clinical practice. Abumi and colleagues68 used pedicle screws in 13 patients with fracture-dislocations of the lower cervical spine with good results and no of complications. In another series,69 these authors reported placement of 191 cervical pedicle screws (most by landmarks) with one transient screw thread–related radiculopathy.

Chapman and colleagues40 published a series of 23 patients instrumented posteriorly using AO plates, as well as cervical lateral mass and thoracic pedicle screws. In this series, they reported a 100% fusion rate, no neurovascular complications, and no hardware complications requiring reoperation. Albert and colleagues39 reviewed 21 patients who were treated with pedicle screws at C7 with the open lamina technique. They found no neurovascular complications and no instrument failures at 1-year follow-up. Lenoir and colleagues achieved fusion in all patients (n = 30) using posterior instrumentation with two delayed mechanical failures.6

New advances in intraoperative image guidance have led to improved accuracy in pedicle screw placement. Bledsoe and colleagues reported the use of three-dimensional image guidance for the placement of 150 pedicle screws. These authors noted 93% accuracy in screw placement with rare grade I pedicle violations based on postoperative CT scans.70 Lee and colleagues compared the placement of thoracic pedicle screws using the open laminotomy technique against computer-assisted techniques and found improved screw placement using the image-guided systems.71 These findings demonstrate that a combination of an extensive anatomic understanding and a knowledge of current technologies offers the best outcome for patients.

Discussion and Conclusion

The anatomy of the upper thoracic spine has made surgical access to this region challenging. The scapula, trapezius, rhomboid, and levator scapulae muscles limit the exposure provided by the traditional costotransversectomy, lateral rachiotomy, and lateral extracavitary procedures. The surgeries designed specifically for this region include the transmanubrial/transclavicular, anterolateral thoracotomy, and lateral parascapular extrapleural approaches.

Among these approaches, the transmanubrial/transclavicular approach of Sundaresan and colleagues18 provides the best approach to a combination of the lower cervical and upper thoracic regions to T3. The transthoracic approach through the third rib exposes the vertebral bodies anterolaterally by opening the intrapleural cavity to reach the paramedian compartment of the retromediastinal space. Exposure of the T3 and T4 vertebral bodies is generally adequate, but access to T1 and T2 is limited by the narrowing of the thoracic inlet.

The lateral parascapular extrapleural approach is an extended posterolateral approach that allows exposure of the T1 to T4 vertebral bodies but limited exposure of C7. In this procedure, the thoracoscapular space is dissected to mobilize the scapula, and the paraspinal musculature is mobilized to open directly into the paramedian compartment of the retromediastinal space. Posterior stabilization can be performed simultaneously through the same incision.

Surgical approaches to the cervicothoracic junction can be divided into these three groups, and the choice of procedure depends on the location and extent of pathology. Considerations for selecting the most appropriate surgical approach are listed in Table 191-4. Pathology that extends from the lower cervical to the upper thoracic region above T3 is most easily approached through a transmanubrial/transclavicular approach. Pathology limited to T3 and T4 can be easily accessed through either the lateral parascapular extrapleural or the anterolateral thoracotomy approaches. Pathology that includes T3 or T4 and extends cephalad to (but no farther than) the C7–T1 disc space is more easily approached through the lateral parascapular extrapleural approach. Thus, a knowledge of this region’s anatomy, surgical approaches, and instrumentation is essential for the successful treatment of the diverse pathologies of the cervicothoracic junction (Fig. 191-16).

TABLE 191-4 Recommended Surgical Approaches

Approach Pathology
Transmanubrial/transclavicular Pathology extends from C6 or C7 to T1 or T2 but not below T2
Lateral parascapular extrapleural or anterolateral thoracotomy Pathology limited to T3 and/or T4
Lateral parascapular extrapleural Pathology extends up to but not beyond C7–T1 disc

Key References

An H.S., Vaccaro A., Cotler J.M., Lin S. Spinal disorders at the cervicothoracic junction. Spine. 1994;19:2557-2564.

Birch R., Bonney G., Marshall R.W. A surgical approach to the cervicothoracic spine. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1990;72:904-907.

Brunig F. Technik der kombinierten Resektionsmethode samtlicher sympathischen Nervenbaum am Halse. Zentralbl Chir. 1923;50:1056-1059.

Butler E.G., Dohrmann P.J., Stark R.J. Spinal subdural abscess. Clin Exp Neurol. 1988;25:67-70.

Capener N. The evolution of lateral rachotomy. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1954;36:173-179.

Edelstyn G.A., Gillespie P.J., Grebbell F.S. The radiological demonstration of osseous metastases. Clin Radiol. 1967;18:158-162.

Fessler R.G., Dietze D.D.Jr., MacMillan M., Peace D. Lateral parascapular extrapleural approach to the upper thoracic spine. J Neurosurg. 1991;75:349-355.

Galasko C.S. Skeletal metastases. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1986;210:18-30.

Gask G.E. The surgery of the sympathetic nervous system. Br J Surg. 1933;21:113-130.

Hodgson A.R., Stock F.E., Fang H.S.Y., Ong G.B. Anterior spinal fusion: The operative approach and pathological findings in 412 patients with Pott’s disease of the spine. Br J Surg. 1960;48:172-178.

Jonnesco T. Le Sympathique Cervico-thoracico. Paris: Masson; 1923.

Larson S.J., Holst R.A., Hemmy D.C., Sances A. Lateral extracavitary approach to traumatic lesions of the thoracic and lumbar spine. J Neurosurg. 1976;45:628-637.

Le H., Balabhadra R., Park J., Kim D. Surgical treatment of tumors involving the cervicothoracic junction. Neurosurg Focus. 2003;15:E3.

Lenoir T., Hoffmann E., Thevenin-Lemoine C., et al. Neurological and functional outcome after unstable cervicothoracic junction injury treated by posterior reduction and synthesis. Spine J. 2006;6:507-513.

Menard V. Etude Pratique sur le Mal de Pott. Paris: Masson; 1910.

Nichols C.G., Young D.H., Schiller W.R. Evaluation of cervicothoracic junction injury. Ann Emerg Med. 1987;16:640-642.

Ochsner A., DeBakey M. Peripheral vascular disease. Surg Gynecol Obstet. 1940;70:1058-1072.

O’Mara R.E. Bone scanning in osseous metastatic disease. JAMA. 1974;229:1915.

Placantonakis D.G., Laufer I., Wang J.C., et al. Posterior stabilization strategies following resection of cervicothoracic junction tumors: review of 90 consecutive cases. J Neurosurg Spine. 2008;9:111-119.

Royle N.D. Observations on the alteration of the circulation of the brain by surgical means in diseases of the central nervous system. Br Med J. 1932;1:1063-1068.

Sapico B.L., Montgomerie J.Z. Vertebral osteomyelitis in intravenous drug abusers: Report of three cases and review of the literature. Rev Infect Dis. 1980;2:196-206.

Sapkas G., Papadakis S., Katonis P., et al. Operative treatment of unstable injuries of the cervicothoracic junction. Eur Spine J. 1999;8:279-283.

Siegal T. Surgical decompression of anterior and posterior malignant epidural tumors compressing the spinal cord: A prospective study. Neurosurgery. 1985;17:424-432.

Sundaresan N., DiGiacinto G.V., Hughes J.E.O., Krol G. Spondylectomy for malignant tumors of the spine. J Clin Oncol. 1989;7:1485-1491.

Sundaresan N., Shah J., Foley K.M., Rosen G. An anterior surgical approach to the upper thoracic vertebrae. J Neurosurg. 1984;61:686-690.

Numbered references appear on Expert Consult.

References

1. Le H., Balabhadra R., Park J., Kim D. Surgical treatment of tumors involving the cervicothoracic junction. Neurosurg Focus. 2003;15:E3.

2. Placantonakis D.G., Laufer I., Wang J.C., et al. Posterior stabilization strategies following resection of cervicothoracic junction tumors: review of 90 consecutive cases. J Neurosurg Spine. 2008;9:111-119.

3. Nichols C.G., Young D.H., Schiller W.R. Evaluation of cervicothoracic junction injury. Ann Emerg Med. 1987;16:640-642.

4. Sapkas G., Papadakis S., Katonis P., et al. Operative treatment of unstable injuries of the cervicothoracic junction. Eur Spine J. 1999;8:279-283.

5. An H.S., Vaccaro A., Cotler J.M., Lin S. Spinal disorders at the cervicothoracic junction. Spine. 1994;19:2557-2564.

6. Lenoir T., Hoffmann E., Thevenin-Lemoine C., et al. Neurological and functional outcome after unstable cervicothoracic junction injury treated by posterior reduction and synthesis. Spine J. 2006;6:507-513.

7. Sundaresan N., DiGiacinto G.V., Hughes J.E.O., Krol G. Spondylectomy for malignant tumors of the spine. J Clin Oncol. 1989;7:1485-1491.

8. Siegal T. Surgical decompression of anterior and posterior malignant epidural tumors compressing the spinal cord: A prospective study. Neurosurgery. 1985;17:424-432.

9. Menard V. Etude Pratique sur le Mal de Pott. Paris: Masson; 1910.

10. Capener N. The evolution of lateral rachotomy. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1954;36:173-179.

11. Larson S.J., Holst R.A., Hemmy D.C., Sances A. Lateral extracavitary approach to traumatic lesions of the thoracic and lumbar spine. J Neurosurg. 1976;45:628-637.

12. Fessler R.G., Dietze D.D.Jr., MacMillan M., Peace D. Lateral parascapular extrapleural approach to the upper thoracic spine. J Neurosurg. 1991;75:349-355.

13. Jonnesco T. Le Sympathique Cervico-thoracico. Paris: Masson; 1923.

14. Brunig F. Technik der kombinierten Resektionsmethode samtlicher sympathischen Nervenbaum am Halse. Zentralbl Chir. 1923;50:1056-1059.

15. Royle N.D. Observations on the alteration of the circulation of the brain by surgical means in diseases of the central nervous system. Br Med J. 1932;1:1063-1068.

16. Gask G.E. The surgery of the sympathetic nervous system. Br J Surg. 1933;21:113-130.

17. Ochsner A., DeBakey M. Peripheral vascular disease. Surg Gynecol Obstet. 1940;70:1058-1072.

18. Sundaresan N., Shah J., Foley K.M., Rosen G. An anterior surgical approach to the upper thoracic vertebrae. J Neurosurg. 1984;61:686-690.

19. Birch R., Bonney G., Marshall R.W. A surgical approach to the cervicothoracic spine. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1990;72:904-907.

20. Hodgson A.R., Stock F.E., Fang H.S.Y., Ong G.B. Anterior spinal fusion: The operative approach and pathological findings in 412 patients with Pott’s disease of the spine. Br J Surg. 1960;48:172-178.

21. Sapico B.L., Montgomerie J.Z. Vertebral osteomyelitis in intravenous drug abusers: Report of three cases and review of the literature. Rev Infect Dis. 1980;2:196-206.

22. Edelstyn G.A., Gillespie P.J., Grebbell F.S. The radiological demonstration of osseous metastases. Clin Radiol. 1967;18:158-162.

23. O’Mara R.E. Bone scanning in osseous metastatic disease. JAMA. 1974;229:1915.

24. Butler E.G., Dohrmann P.J., Stark R.J. Spinal subdural abscess. Clin Exp Neurol. 1988;25:67-70.

25. Galasko C.S. Skeletal metastases. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1986;210:18-30.

26. Schlaeffer F., Mikolich D.J., Mates S.M. Technetium Tc 99m diphosphonate bone scan: False normal findings in elderly patients with hematogenous vertebral osteomyelitis. Arch Intern Med. 1987;147:2024-2026.

27. Staab E.V., McCartney W.H. Role of gallium 67 in inflammatory disease. Semin Nucl Med. 1978;8:219-234.

28. Bruns J., Maas R. Advantages of diagnosing bacterial spondylitis with magnetic resonance imaging. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 1989;108:30-35.

29. Paushter D.M., Modic M.T., Masaryk T.J. Magnetic resonance imaging of the spine: Applications and limitations. Radiol Clin North Am. 1985;23:551-562.

30. Oda I., Abumi K., Lu D., et al. Biomechanical role of the posterior elements, costovertebral joints, and rib cage in the stability of the thoracic spine. Spine. 1996;21:1423-1429.

31. Berg E.E. The sternal-rib complex: A possible fourth column in thoracic spine fractures. Spine. 1993;18:1916-1919.

32. An H.S., Wise J.J., Xu R. Anatomy of the cervicothoracic junction: A study of cadaveric dissection, cryomicrotomy, and magnetic resonance imaging. J Spinal Disord. 1999;12:519-525.

33. Pal G.P., Routal R.V. A study of weight transmission through the cervical and upper thoracic regions of the vertebral column in man. J Anat. 1986;148:245-261.

34. Boyle J.J., Singer K.P., Milne N. Morphological survey of the cervicothoracic junctional region. Spine. 1996;21:544-548.

35. Yasuoka S., Peterson H.A., MacCarty C.S. Incidence of spinal column deformity after multilevel laminectomy in children and adults. J Neurosurg. 1982;57:441-445.

36. Inoue A., Ikata T., Katoh S. Spinal deformity following surgery for spinal cord tumors and tumorous lesions: Analysis based on an assessment of the spinal functional curve. Spinal Cord. 1996;34:536-542.

37. Drennan J.C., King E.W. Cervical dislocation following fusion of the upper thoracic spine for scoliosis: A case report. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1978;60:1003-1005.

38. Steinmetz M.P., Miller J., Warbel A., et al. Regional instability following cervicothoracic junction surgery. J Neurosurg Spine. 2006;4:278-284.

39. Albert T.J., Klein G.R., Joffe D., Vaccaro A.R. Use of cervicothoracic junction pedicle screws for reconstruction of complex cervical spine pathology. Spine. 1998;23:1596-1599.

40. Chapman J.R., Anderson P.A., Pepin C., et al. Posterior instrumentation of the unstable cervicothoracic spine. J Neurosurg. 1996;84:552-558.

41. Ulrich C., Arand M., Nothwang J. Internal fixation on the lower cervical spine: biomechanics and clinical practice of procedures and implants. Eur Spine J. 2001;10:88-100.

42. O’Brien J.R., Dmitriev A.E., Yu W., et al. Posterior-only stabilization of 2-column and 3-column injuries at the cervicothoracic junction: a biomechanical study. J Spinal Disord Tech. 2009;22:340-346.

43. Wellman B.J., Follett K.A., Traynelis V.C. Complications of posterior articular mass plate fixation of the subaxial cervical spine in 43 consecutive patients. Spine. 1998;23:193-200.

44. Ulrich C., Woersdoerfer O., Kalff R., et al. Biomechanics of fixation systems to the cervical spine. Spine. 1991;16(suppl 3):S4-S9.

45. Heller J.G., Estes B.T., Zaouali M., Diop A. Biomechanical study of screws in the lateral masses: Variables affecting pull-out resistance. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1996;78:1315-1321.

46. Kotani Y., Cunningham B.W., Abumi K., McAfee P.C. Biomechanical analysis of cervical stabilization systems: An assessment of transpedicular screw fixation in the cervical spine. Spine. 1994;19:2529-2539.

47. Rhee J.M., Kraiwattanapong C., Hutton W.C. A comparison of pedicle and lateral mass screw construct stiffnesses at the cervicothoracic junction: a biomechanical study. Spine. 2005;30:E636-E640.

48. Miller R.M., Ebraheim N.A., Xu R., Yeasting R.A. Anatomic consideration of transpedicular screw placement in the cervical spine: An analysis of two approaches. Spine. 1996;21:2317-2322.

49. Bueff H.U., Lotz J.C., Colliou O.K., et al. Instrumentation of the cervicothoracic junction after destabilization. Spine. 1995;20:1789-1792.

50. Boockvar J.A., Philips M.F., Telfeian A.E., et al. Results and risk factors for anterior cervicothoracic junction surgery. J Neurosurg. 2001;94(suppl 1):12-17.

51. Vaccaro R., Conant R.F., Hilibrand A.S., Albert T.J. A plate–rod device for treatment of cervicothoracic disorders: Comparison of mechanical testing with established cervical spine in vitro load testing data. J Spinal Disord. 2000;13:350-355.

52. Kreshak J.L., Kim D.H., Lindsey D.P., et al. Posterior stabilization at the cervicothoracic junction: A biomechanical study. Spine. 2002;27:2763-2770.

53. Prybis B.G., Tortolani P.J., Hu N., et al. A comparative biomechanical analysis of spinal instability and instrumentation of the cervicothoracic junction: an in vitro human cadaveric model. J Spinal Disord Tech. 2007;20:233-238.

54. Kaya R.A., Türkmenoglu O.N., Koç O.N., et al. A perspective for the selection of surgical approaches in patients with upper thoracic and cervicothoracic junction instabilities. Surg Neurol. 2006;65:454-463.

55. Liu Y.L., Hao Y.J., Li T., et al. Trans-upper sternal approach to the cervicothoracic junction. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2009;467:2018-2024.

56. Pointillart V., Aurouer N., Gangnet N., Vital J.M. Anterior approach to the cervicothoracic junction without sternotomy: a report of 37 cases. Spine. 2007;32:2875-2879.

57. Teng H., Hsiang J., Wu C., et al. Surgery in the cervicothoracic junction with an anterior low suprasternal approach alone or combined with manubriotomy and sternotomy: an approach selection method based on the cervicothoracic angle. J Neurosurg Spine. 2009;10:531-542.

58. Kaneda K., Kurakami C., Minami A. Free vascularized fibular strut graft in the treatment of kyphosis. Spine. 1988;13:1273-1277.

59. Roy-Camille R., SG, Mazel C. Internal fixation of the unstable cervical spine by a posterior osteosynthesis with plates and screws. In: Sherk H.H., Dunn E.J., Eismont F.J., et al. The Cervical Spine. 2nd ed. Philadelphia: JB Lippincott; 1989:390-403.

60. Xu R., Ebraheim N.A., Ou Y., Yeasting R.A. Anatomic considerations of pedicle screw placement in the thoracic spine: Roy-Camille technique versus open-lamina technique. Spine. 1998;23:1065-1068.

61. Xu R., Ebraheim N.A., Tang G., Stanescu S. Location of the vertebral artery in the cervicothoracic junction. Am J Orthop. 2000;29:453-456.

62. An H.S., Gordin R., Renner K. Anatomic considerations in plate–screw fixation of the cervical spine. Spine. 1981;16(Suppl):548-551.

63. Stanescu S., Ebraheim N.A., Yeasting R., et al. Morphometric evaluation of the cervico-thoracic junction. Spine. 1994;19:2082-2088.

64. Panjabi M.M., Duranceau J., Goel V., et al. Cervical human vertebrae: Quantitative three-dimensional anatomy of the middle and lower regions. Spine. 1991;16:861-869.

65. Karaikovic E.E., Daubs M.D., Gaines R.W.Jr. Morphologic characteristics of human cervical pedicles. Spine. 1997;22:493-500.

66. Miller R.C., Bonner J.A., Wenger D.E., et al. Spinal cord localization in the treatment of lung cancer: Use of radiographic landmarks. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 1998;40:347-351.

67. Jeanneret B., Gebhard J.S., Magerl F. Transpedicular screw fixation of articular mass fracture–separation: Result of an anatomical study and operative technique. J Spinal Disord. 1994;7:222-229.

68. Abumi K., Itoh H., Taneichi H., Kaneda K. Transpedicular screw fixation for traumatic lesions of the middle and lower cervical spine: Description of the techniques and preliminary report. J Spinal Disord. 1994;7:19-28.

69. Abumi K., Kaneda K. Pedicle screw fixation for nontraumatic lesions of the cervical spine. Spine. 1997;22:1853-1863.

70. Bledsoe J.M., Fenton D., Fogelson J.L., Nottmeier E.W. Accuracy of upper thoracic pedicle screw placement using three-dimensional image guidance. Spine J. 2009;9:817-821.

71. Lee G.Y., Massicotte E.M., Rampersaud Y.R. Clinical accuracy of cervicothoracic pedicle screw placement: a comparison of the “open” lamino-foraminotomy and computer-assisted techniques. J Spinal Disord Tech. 2007;20:25-32.