Transoral and transnasal odontoidectomy complications: A systematic review and meta-analysis

• Thirteen studies (92 patients) used a transnasal approach.
• The remaining thirteen studies (1238 patients) performed a transoral approach.
• Transoral odontoidectomy exhibited 90.0% neurologic improvement and 0.9% worsening.
• Transnasal odontoidectomy showed 94.0% neurologic improvement and 0.0% worsening.
• Transoral approach had a significantly higher rate of postoperative tracheostomy.

ObjectThe craniovertebral junction (CVJ) is a complex region of the spine with unique anatomical and functional relationships. To alleviate symptoms associated with pathological processes involving the odontoid process, decompression is often required, including odontoidectomy. Accurate knowledge of the complication rates following the transoral and transnasal techniques is essential for both patients and surgeons.MethodsWe conducted MEDLINE, Scopus and Web of Science database searches for studies reporting complications associated with the transoral and transnasal techniques for odontoidectomy. Case series presenting data for less than three patients were excluded. Rates of complication and clinical outcomes were calculated and subsequently analyzed using a fixed-effects model to assess statistical significance.ResultsOf 1288 articles retrieved from MEDLINE, Scopus, and Web of Science, twenty-six met inclusion criteria. Transoral and transnasal procedures resulted in the following respective complication rates: arterial injury 1.9% and 0.0%, intraoperative CSF leak 0.3% and 30.0%, postoperative CSF leak 0.8% and 5.2%, 30-day mortality 2.9% and 4.4%, medical complications 13.9% and 28.6%, meningitis 1.0% and 4.0%, pharyngeal wound dehiscence 1.7% (transnasal not reported), pneumonia 10.3% (transnasal not reported), prolonged or re-intubation 5.6% and 6.0%, reoperation 2.5% and 5.1%, sepsis 1.9% and 7.7%, tracheostomy 10.8% and 3.4%, velopharyngeal insufficiency 3.3% and 6.4% and wound infection 3.3% and 1.9%. None of these differences were statistically significant, except for postoperative tracheostomy, which was significantly higher after transoral odontoidectomy 8.4% (95% CI 4.9% −11.9%) compared to transnasal odontoidectomy 0.8% (95% CI −1.0% −2.9%). Neurologic outcome was improved in 90.0% and worse in 0.9% of patients after transoral compared to 94.0% and 0.0% after transnasal odontoidectomy (p = 0.30).ConclusionsThis work presents a systematic review of complications reported for transoral or transnasal odontoidectomy across a heterogeneous group of surgeons and patients. Due to inconsistent reporting, statistical significance was only achieved for postoperative tracheostomy, which was significantly higher in the transoral group. This investigation sets the framework for further discussions regarding odontoidectomy approach options and their associated complications during the informed consent process.