Hangman's Fractures


Article Author:
Devon LeFever
Stephen Whipple


Article Editor:
Richard Menger


Editors In Chief:
Kranthi Sitammagari
Mayank Singhal


Managing Editors:
Avais Raja
Orawan Chaigasame
Carrie Smith
Abdul Waheed
Khalid Alsayouri
Trevor Nezwek
Radia Jamil
Erin Hughes
Patrick Le
Anoosh Zafar Gondal
Saad Nazir
William Gossman
Hassam Zulfiqar
Hussain Sajjad
Steve Bhimji
Muhammad Hashmi
John Shell
Matthew Varacallo
Heba Mahdy
Ahmad Malik
Sarosh Vaqar
Mark Pellegrini
James Hughes
Beata Beatty
Beenish Sohail
Nazia Sadiq
Hajira Basit
Phillip Hynes


Updated:
6/10/2019 10:18:59 PM

Introduction

A hangman’s fracture is better described as bilateral fracture traversing the pars interarticularis of C2 with an associated traumatic subluxation of C2 on C3. It is the second most common fracture of the C2 vertebrae following a fracture of the odontoid process and is almost always stable without the need for surgical intervention. Steele’s rule of thirds states that the cross-sectional area at the level of the atlas may be divided into three equally represented parts: the dens, space, and the spinal cord. This increased area for the spinal cord at this level is what allows for the relative lack of neurologic injury associated with a hangman’s fracture. [1]

Etiology

Schneider et al.[2] coined the term hangman’s fracture in 1965. Despite the term implying a hyperextension and distraction injury; such as in the case of a judicial hanging, the more common mechanism of action is hyperextension and axial loading. These injuries are most commonly seen in motor-vehicle accidents, diving injuries, or contact sports.

Epidemiology

Fractures of the cervical spine are present in 1% to 3% of all trauma cases, of which 9% to 18% are of the C2 vertebrae. The incidence of C2 fractures has doubled from 3 per 100,000 to 6 per 100,000 from 1997 to 2014 in data reported from the Swedish National Patient Registry. Fractures of the odontoid process are much more common, representing 35% to 78% of all C2 fractures in the general population and as much as 89% of patient’s older than 70 years old. Meanwhile, hangman’s fractures represent 11% to 25% of all C2 vertebrae fractures. [3]

Pathophysiology

It is vitally important to keep in mind the unique anatomy of the atlas-axis complex when treating their associated injuries. Unlike the subaxial cervical spine, the C1 to C2 complex does not contain an intervertebral disc; there are unique ligaments allowing for support of the cranium as well as providing the majority of cervical rotation. There is also a close relationship of the transverse foramen, which carries the vertebral artery through the cervical spine, with the C2 pedicle/pars interarticularis, which may slightly weaken this area allowing for a fracture to occur.

Multiple grading systems for hangman’s fractures exist; however, the Levine and Edwards classifications are the most widely used.

Levine and Edwards Classification[4]

Specifics

Angulation in this system is measured as the angle between the inferior endplate of C2 and C3. Anterior subluxation of C2 on C3 greater than 3 mm serves as a marker for C2 to C3 intervertebral disc disruption. It is important to recognize that this grading system is not applicaple in the pediatric population.

Grading

  • Type 1: Less than 3 mm subluxation of C2 on C3, due to axial loading, stable, rigid cervical collar treatment
  • Type 2: Disruption of the C2 to C3 disc, posterior longitudinal ligament, greater than 4 mm subluxation, greater than 11 degrees angulation, less than 5 mm requires a reduction in axial traction and halo fixation for 6 to 12 weeks while those greater than 5 mm can require surgery
  • Type 2a: Less displacement more angular deformity, flexion injury, unstable, not suitable for axial traction, treatment in halo
  • Type 3: C2 to C3 facet capsule disrupted, anterior longitudinal ligament disruption, unstable, may have deficit, surgical candidates

Francis Grading System[5]

Specifics

Two factors are taken into consideration for the Francis Grading system: angulation and displacement. Angulation is measured by the degree of anterior angulation off of the posterior vertebral line drawn straight up from the C3 vertebral body. Displacement is measured by the amount of anterolisthesis, either greater than or less than 3.5 mm.

Grading

  • Type 1: Less than 11 degrees of angulation and less than 3.5 mm of displacement
  • Type 2: Greater than 11 degrees of angulation and less than 3.5 mm of displacement
  • Type 3: Less than 11 degrees of angulation and greater than 3.5 mm displacement
  • Type 4: Greater than 11 degrees of angulation and greater than 3.5 mm of displacement
  • Type 5: Complete disc disruption

Typical versus Atypical Fractures

It is important to recognize that not all C2, hangman’s type fractures can be described using these classification systems. A typical hangman’s fracture allows for separation of the anterior elements from the posterior elements of the C2 vertebrae, therefore increase the available space for the spinal cord. However, in the case of an atypical hangman’s fracture the posterior aspect of the C2 vertebral body, not the bilateral pars, is involved. This leads to a higher risk of neurologic injury as the space remaining for the spinal cord does not increase secondary to the fracture.

History and Physical

It is important to recognize that outside of the obvious motor vehicle collisions, and high-impact falls, low-energy and blunt trauma, especially in the elderly population, can induce significant unstable injury. History should also entertain risk factors for fracture such as osteoporosis, metastatic burden, or vitamin D deficiencies. Physical exam findings include pain with palpation in the posterior portion of the neck, radiculopathy, myelopathy, and possible posterior fossa findings secondary to vertebral artery injury. A strict neurologic exam including cranial nerves, sensory, motor, and rectal tone is mandatory.

Evaluation

Laboratory tests should be ordered as an adjunct in overall medical status.  Normalized hemoglobin, hematocrit, PT/PTT, INR, and platelet counts will be needed for operative intervention.

X-ray

Evaluation of with x-rays will provide limited but important information. Care must be taken to ensure proper radiographic imaging creates a picture from the occiput to the C7 through T1 disc space. This is essential in reviewing cervical spine trauma. Lateral, anteroposterior (AP), and open-mouth odontoid views are necessary. Approximately, 93% of cervical spine injuries are apparent with combined, lateral, AP, and odontoid view radiographs. X-rays are an excellent modality for determining alignment during the immediate injury, post-operative period, as well as long-term, follow up.

CT Scan

CT scan is the most important modality for determining fracture etiology and ruling out injury with regards to a C2 fracture. Even if plain films are negative and clinical suspicion is high a CT scan is warranted. CT scan does not directly evaluate the spinal cord, soft tissue, or ligamentous construct. It is important to recognize the importance that complete imaging will require dedicated thin-cut CT reconstructions. Non-contrast CT scan is adequate for evaluation of the bony anatomy for fracture. This can be coupled with a CT angiogram (see below) for evaluation of the vascular anatomy.

MRI

Evaluation with MRI is important for the analysis of the ligamentous construct, disc space, spinal cord, nerve roots, and other soft tissue injuries. MRI is also useful for determining the acute nature of the fracture when this is otherwise unknown. This is done via non-contrasted imaging. T2 signal hyperintensities and STIR changes within the dens, ligaments, or soft tissue can illustrate an acute component.  MRI is less dangerous than flexion-extension cervical injury. Furthermore, MRI evaluation is mandatory in the evaluation of the transverse ligament for the surgical decision matrix of non-displaced type II odontoid fractures. An intact transverse ligament is needed for the anterior placement of an odontoid screw.

Vascular Imaging

Vascular imaging may be indicated. The vertebral artery’s second segment (V2) runs through the transverse foramen of C2 to C6 while V3 runs extradurally exiting the C2 foramen across the sulcus arteriosus.  This can place it at risk for injury. Indeed, in one series 15% of patients with C1 to C2 fractures had a vertebral artery injury. Of which, type-III odontoid fractures posed the greatest risk. It is important to note that an untreated vertebral artery injury has a 24% stroke rate. CT angiography can be coupled to CT imaging upon fracture evaluation with consideration of kidney function. Level-III evidence suggests that patients with C1 to C3 fractures can be screened with multi-slice multi-detector CT angiography. At this time MR angiography cannot be listed as the sole imaging modality for the evaluation of vertebral artery injury. First-line investigation with percutaneous angiography is overly aggressive.[6],[7]

Treatment / Management

Treatment options include conservative management, cervical orthosis, halo-vest orthosis, and surgical procedures.

External Fixation

Rigid cervical collar represents the immediate first treatment. While nonunion may occur as frequently as 50% in odontoid fractures, nonunion is rare in hangman’s fractures with approximately 90% healing with immobilization alone. There is level III evidence that a hangman’s fracture may be initially managed with immobilization with a halo-vest or collar alone. This produces a reduction rate of 97% to 100% and the fusion rate of 93% to 100%. External orthosis should be maintained for 8 to 14 weeks. It is important to remember that halo-vest orthosis but is not very well tolerated in the elderly population, and therefore collar is recommended as first-line management.[8],[9],[10]

Internal Fixation

Surgical fixation may be considered in the following scenarios:

  • Severe angulation of C2 on C3 (Francis II and IV, Levine II)
  • Disruption of the C2 to C3 disc space (Francis V, Levine II)
  • Anterior displacement of C2 greater than 50% on C3
  • Inability to establish or maintain alignment with external immobilization
  • Nonunion after use of external immobilization

Internal fixation can be achieved via anterior fixation or by a variety of posterior constructs.

Anterior[5]

C2 to C3 anterior cervical discectomy and fusion may be used with anterior plating to stabilize the C2 to C3 vertebral bodies. The main benefit of the anterior approach is the preservation of the C1 motion which drastically decreases the morbidity when compared to posterior fixation.

Posterior[11]

  • C1 to C2 transarticular screws
  • C1 lateral mass and C2 pedicle screws
  • C1 lateral mass and C2 pars interarticularis screws
  • C1 to C2 wiring (also as an adjunct technique)
  • Extension to C3 lateral mass if there is disruption of the C2 to C3 intervertebral disc or facet joint capsules

Posterior fixation technique selection requires significant review by a neurosurgeon or orthopedic spine surgeon. It takes into consideration a variety of factors including surgeon experience, fracture location, vertebral artery location, biomechanical suitability, and anatomical variations. Vascular imaging is mandatory to illustrate the location of the vertebral artery in the V2 and V3 segments. Patient’s overall functional status, medical optimization, and bone health must be evaluated in the operative decision-making.

Differential Diagnosis

Differential diagnoses include pseudosubluxation (generaly C2 on C3) and Mach effect.

Pearls and Other Issues

A rigid cervical collar should be immediately placed in the emergency room setting.

The majority of Hangman’s fractures may be successfully treated with external orthosis alone.

Vascular imaging should be performed in all C1 to C3 fractures. 

Enhancing Healthcare Team Outcomes

Fractures of the spine are best managed by a multidisciplinary team that includes orthopedic and neurology nurses, and therapists. Clinicians should be aware that imaging is critical for the diagnosis of hangman's fracture. CT scan is the most important modality for determining fracture etiology and ruling out injury with regards to a C2 fracture. Even if plain films are negative and clinical suspicion is high a CT scan is warranted. CT scan does not directly evaluate the spinal cord, soft tissue, or ligamentous construct. It is important to recognize the importance that complete imaging will require dedicated thin-cut CT reconstructions. Non-contrast CT scan is adequate for evaluation of the bony anatomy for fracture. This can be coupled with a CT angiogram for evaluation of the vascular anatomy. A missed injury can prove to fatal.

Most patients can be managed with external support and with time full recovery is possible. [12]


Interested in Participating?

We are looking for contributors to author, edit, and peer review our vast library of review articles and multiple choice questions. In as little as 2-3 hours you can make a significant contribution to your specialty. In return for a small amount of your time, you will receive free access to all content and you will be published as an author or editor in eBooks, apps, online CME/CE activities, and an online Learning Management System for students, teachers, and program directors that allows access to review materials in over 500 specialties.

Improve Content - Become an Author or Editor

This is an academic project designed to provide inexpensive peer-reviewed Apps, eBooks, and very soon an online CME/CE system to help students identify weaknesses and improve knowledge. We would like you to consider being an author or editor. Please click here to learn more. Thank you for you for your interest, the StatPearls Publishing Editorial Team.

Hangman's Fractures - Questions

Take a quiz of the questions on this article.

Take Quiz
At which anatomic site does the hangman's fracture occur?



Click Your Answer Below


Would you like to access teaching points and more information on this topic?

Improve Content - Become an Author or Editor and get free access to the entire database, free eBooks, as well as free CME/CE as it becomes available. If interested, please click on "Sign Up" to register.

Purchase- Want immediate access to questions, answers, and teaching points? They can be purchased above at Apps and eBooks.


Sign Up
A 45-year-old male with a past medical history of hypertension, hyperlipidemia, and asthma is brought to the emergency department after an accident in a factory. He was working when his hair was caught in a machine that rapidly pulled his head back in hyperextension. The patient was able to be disconnected from the machine. He is complaining of extreme neck pain. He had lateral x-rays, which showed no fracture. He is hemodynamically stable and has no obvious neuro-deficits. The patient is discharged on muscle relaxers and pain medications without further workup. Later that day, the patient returns to the emergency department with intractable nausea and vomiting, and complaints of the “room spinning.” A CT head is ordered which reveals an area of hypodensity in the left cerebellum. Which of the following is the most likely cause of this patient’s symptoms?



Click Your Answer Below


Would you like to access teaching points and more information on this topic?

Improve Content - Become an Author or Editor and get free access to the entire database, free eBooks, as well as free CME/CE as it becomes available. If interested, please click on "Sign Up" to register.

Purchase- Want immediate access to questions, answers, and teaching points? They can be purchased above at Apps and eBooks.


Sign Up
An 87-year-old female with a past medical history of hypothyroidism, beta-thalassemia minor, osteoporosis, and atrial fibrillation presents to the trauma bay after a motor vehicle collision. She was driving 50 miles per hour when she ran off the road and hit a pole. She was wearing her seat belt. EMS reports no loss of consciousness or prolonged extraction. On the scene, her blood pressure was 90/60 mmHg, heart rate 120/min, respiratory rate 23/min, and O2 saturation of 94%. On arrival at the trauma bay, the patient is alert and oriented but complaining of abdominal pain. On exam, she is GCS 15 and neurologically intact, but she complains of posterior superior midline neck pain and is exquisitely tender to abdominal palpation. She reports she is currently taking a blood thinner for her atrial fibrillation. FAST exam shows positive results in the pelvis concerning for a large amount of blood. Repeat vitals show blood pressure 60/40 mmHg, heart rate 130/min, respiratory rate 24/min, and O2 saturation 91%. The trauma surgeons want to perform an emergent exploratory laparotomy. What intervention should be performed immediately before she is taken to the operating room for trauma surgery?



Click Your Answer Below


Would you like to access teaching points and more information on this topic?

Improve Content - Become an Author or Editor and get free access to the entire database, free eBooks, as well as free CME/CE as it becomes available. If interested, please click on "Sign Up" to register.

Purchase- Want immediate access to questions, answers, and teaching points? They can be purchased above at Apps and eBooks.


Sign Up
A 19-year-old male is brought to the trauma bay after being found by his roommate shortly after a suicide attempt by hanging himself in their dorm room. On arrival, the patient is hemodynamically stable and neurologically intact. He is placed in a rigid cervical collar in transport, and he is taken to the CT scanner on arrival. A non-displaced bilateral C2 pars interarticularis fracture with less than 3 mm subluxation of C2 on C3 is reported by the radiologist. The family asks about the prognosis of his injury and plan of care. What is the most appropriate response?



Click Your Answer Below


Would you like to access teaching points and more information on this topic?

Improve Content - Become an Author or Editor and get free access to the entire database, free eBooks, as well as free CME/CE as it becomes available. If interested, please click on "Sign Up" to register.

Purchase- Want immediate access to questions, answers, and teaching points? They can be purchased above at Apps and eBooks.


Sign Up
A 65-year-old male with a history of stage 4 prostate cancer with multiple bony metastases presents to the emergency department after a bicycle accident complaining only of neck pain and multiple excoriations to his body. He was placed is in a rigid cervical collar upon presentation. He reports he fell over the front of his bicycle when he hit a pothole. He remembers landing on his hands and chin. He is neurologically intact. A CT is performed, and a bilateral C2 pars interarticularis fracture with disruption of the C2 to C3 disc with greater than 4 mm subluxation of C2 on C3 is noted. Which additional structure is most at risk of being injured?



Click Your Answer Below


Would you like to access teaching points and more information on this topic?

Improve Content - Become an Author or Editor and get free access to the entire database, free eBooks, as well as free CME/CE as it becomes available. If interested, please click on "Sign Up" to register.

Purchase- Want immediate access to questions, answers, and teaching points? They can be purchased above at Apps and eBooks.


Sign Up
A 75-year-old female presents to the emergency department who was in a motor vehicle collision and had a Hangman fracture on CT imaging without any vascular injury on angiography. She is placed in a rigid cervical collar and has no neuro-deficits. The CT demonstrates less than 11 degrees of angulation of the C2 body and greater than 3.5 mm displacement. Which of the following is the next best step in the management of this patient?



Click Your Answer Below


Would you like to access teaching points and more information on this topic?

Improve Content - Become an Author or Editor and get free access to the entire database, free eBooks, as well as free CME/CE as it becomes available. If interested, please click on "Sign Up" to register.

Purchase- Want immediate access to questions, answers, and teaching points? They can be purchased above at Apps and eBooks.


Sign Up

Hangman's Fractures - References

References

Spence KF Jr,Decker S,Sell KW, Bursting atlantal fracture associated with rupture of the transverse ligament. The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume. 1970 Apr     [PubMed]
SCHNEIDER RC,LIVINGSTON KE,CAVE AJ,HAMILTON G,     [PubMed]
Levine AM,Edwards CC, The management of traumatic spondylolisthesis of the axis. The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume. 1985 Feb     [PubMed]
Tuite GF,Papadopoulos SM,Sonntag VK, Caspar plate fixation for the treatment of complex hangman's fractures. Neurosurgery. 1992 May     [PubMed]
Coric D,Wilson JA,Kelly DL Jr, Treatment of traumatic spondylolisthesis of the axis with nonrigid immobilization: a review of 64 cases. Journal of neurosurgery. 1996 Oct     [PubMed]
Robinson AL,Olerud C,Robinson Y, Epidemiology of C2 Fractures in the 21st Century: A National Registry Cohort Study of 6,370 Patients from 1997 to 2014. Advances in orthopedics. 2017     [PubMed]
Gupta P,Kumar A,Gamangatti S, Mechanism and patterns of cervical spine fractures-dislocations in vertebral artery injury. Journal of craniovertebral junction     [PubMed]
Francis WR,Fielding JW,Hawkins RJ,Pepin J,Hensinger R, Traumatic spondylolisthesis of the axis. The Journal of bone and joint surgery. British volume. 1981     [PubMed]
Pratt H,Davies E,King L, Traumatic injuries of the c1/c2 complex: computed tomographic imaging appearances. Current problems in diagnostic radiology. 2008 Jan-Feb     [PubMed]
Sonntag VK,Hadley MN, Nonoperative management of cervical spine injuries. Clinical neurosurgery. 1988     [PubMed]
Menger RP,Storey CM,Nixon MK,Haydel J,Nanda A,Sin A, Placement of C1 Pedicle Screws Using Minimal Exposure: Radiographic, Clinical, and Literature Validation. International journal of spine surgery. 2015     [PubMed]
Pehler S,Jones R,Staggers JR,Antonetti J,McGwin G,Theiss SM, Clinical Outcomes of Cervical Facet Fractures Treated Nonoperatively With Hard Collar or Halo Immobilization. Global spine journal. 2019 Feb;     [PubMed]

Disclaimer

The intent of StatPearls is to provide practice questions and explanations to assist you in identifying and resolving knowledge deficits. These questions and explanations are not intended to be a source of the knowledge base of all of medicine, nor is it intended to be a board or certification review of PA-Hospital Medicine. The authors or editors do not warrant the information is complete or accurate. The reader is encouraged to verify each answer and explanation in several references. All drug indications and dosages should be verified before administration.

StatPearls offers the most comprehensive database of free multiple-choice questions with explanations and short review chapters ever developed. This system helps physicians, medical students, dentists, nurses, pharmacists, and allied health professionals identify education deficits and learn new concepts. StatPearls is not a board or certification review system for PA-Hospital Medicine, it is a learning system that you can use to help improve your knowledge base of medicine for life-long learning. StatPearls will help you identify your weaknesses so that when you are ready to study for a board or certification exam in PA-Hospital Medicine, you will already be prepared.

Our content is updated continuously through a multi-step peer review process that will help you be prepared and review for a thorough knowledge of PA-Hospital Medicine. When it is time for the PA-Hospital Medicine board and certification exam, you will already be ready. Besides online study quizzes, we also publish our peer-reviewed content in eBooks and mobile Apps. We also offer inexpensive CME/CE, so our content can be used to attain education credits while you study PA-Hospital Medicine.