{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.015436241610738255, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0020134228187919465, 'mean_word_length': 5.808219178082192, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Indications of Philadelphia collar in the treatment of upper cervical injuries

The principles of the management of upper cervical injuries remain controversial. The specific anatomical conditions render upper cervical injuries more problematic than lower cervical injuries. Here we present and discuss our experiences with upper cervical injury, comparing them with other treatment modalities. The 24 patients admitted to our department with upper cervical injury were treated surgically or conservatively according to their neurological and radiological status. Five patients were treated surgically due to neurological abnormality associated with compression to neural structures observed in computerized tomography/magnetic resonance imaging (CT/MRI). Patients with no neural compression were managed conservatively, with the Philadelphia collar. All patients showed stable fracture healing and experienced no additional clinical disability on follow-up after a minimum of 3 months, except one who died due to cardiac and respiratory failure. Regardless of the type of injury, indication for surgery in many cases of upper cervical injury is neurological abnormality associated with radiologically observed neural compression. It is our belief that, in the absence of both neurological abnormality and compression to neural structures observed in CT/MRI, treatment with the Philadelphia collar alone is safe, cost-effective and easily applicable for many cases of upper cervical injury.