Morphometric measurements in thoracal vertebral fractures

In this study, we aimed to compare the pedicle morphometric measurements of patients with thoracic vertebral fractures, who were admitted to the emergency department after trauma, and normal population, with the help of tomography. 252 patients with thoracic vertebral fracture between January 2017 and December 2019 were included in the study. The patients were divided into two as operated (Group 1, n: 169) and non-operated (Group 2, n: 83) groups. Transverse and sagittal pedicle diameters of all patients' thoracic vertebrae were measured by computed tomography. These values were compared with the normal population. 252 patients (148 male) were included in the study. Most of the fractures were seen in the T12 vertebrae. The least affected vertebrae were T1 and T2. In males, the thinnest transverse pedicle diameter was measured at the T4 while the thickest transverse pedicle was measured at the T12 level. In females, the thinnest transverse pedicle was measured at the T6 level while the thickest transverse pedicle was measured at the T12 level. In men, the thinnest sagittal pedicle was measured at the T3 level while the thickest sagittal pedicle was measured at the T12 level. The thinnest sagittal pedicle diameter was measured at the T7 vertebra level while the thickest sagittal pedicle was measured at the T12 level. Transverse and sagittal pedicle measurements were found to be higher in males than in females at almost all thoracic vertebra levels. Transverse and sagittal pedicle diameters of patients with thoracic vertebral fracture were significantly lesser than normal population. Pedicle diameter reveals significant individual and segmental differences in the thoracic region. Patients with similar traumas, who also have a pedicle diameter below the mean value, are more likely to develop fractures.

___

1. Roy-Camille R, Saillant G, Berteaux D, et al. Vertebral osteosynthesis using metal plates. Its different uses. Chirurgie. 1979;105:597–603.

2. Ashman RB, Galpin RD, Corin JD, et al. Biomechanical analysis of pedicle screw instrumentation systems in a corpectomy model. Spine. 1989;14:1398–405.

3. Ebraheim NA, Xu R, Ahmad M, et al. Projection of the thoracic pedicle and its morphometric analysis. Spine. 1997;22:233–8.

4. Schizas C, Michel J, Kosmopoulos V, et al. Computer tomography assessment of pedicle screw insertion in percutaneous posterior transpedicular stabilization. Eur Spine J. 2007;16:613–7.

5. Chiba M, McLain RF, Yerby SA, et al. Short-segment pedicle instrumentation. Biomechanical analysis of supplemental hook fixation. Spine. 1996;21:288–94.

6. Liljenqvist U, Hackenberg L, Link T,et al. Pullout strength of pedicle screws versus pedicle and laminar hooks in the thoracic spine. Acta Orthop Belg. 2001;67:157–63.

7. Kemal Koc R. Koç RK. Torakolomber travmalarda cerrahi tedavi.In: Hancı M,Çağlı S (ed), Omurga ve Omurilik Yaralanmaları. TND yayınları. 1997;33-144.

8. Akbarnia BA, Crandall DG, Burkus K, et al. Use of long rods and a short arthrodesis for burst fractures of the thoracolumbar spine. A long-term follow-up study. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1994;76:1629–35.

9. France JC, Yaszemski MJ, Lauerman WC, et al. A randomized prospective study of posterolateral lumbar fusion. Outcomes with and without pedicle screw instrumentation. Spine. 1999;24:553–60.

10. Islam C, Güzel MB, Sakul BU. Clinical importance of the minimal cancellous diameter of lower thoracic and lumbar vertebral pedicles. Clin Anat. 1996;9:151–4.

11. Yu CC, Bajwa NS, Toy JO, et al. Pedicle morphometry of upper thoracic vertebrae: an anatomic study of 503 cadaveric specimens. Spine. 2014;39:E1201-9.

12. Yu CC, Yuh RT, Bajwa NS, et al. Lower thoracic pedicle morphometry: male, taller, and heavier specimens have bigger pedicles. Spine. 2015;40:E323- 31.

13. Chen H-J, Xiao Z-G, Yu R-H, et al. CT measurement and analysis of the target vertebral body in elderly patients with uncompressed osteoporotic thoracolumbar fractures. Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci. 2018;22:36–44.

14. Laine T, Mäkitalo K, Schlenzka D, et al. Accuracy of pedicle screw insertion: a prospective CT study in 30 low back patients. Eur Spine J. 1997;6:402–5.

15. Belmont PJ, Klemme WR, Dhawan A, et al. In vivo accuracy of thoracic pedicle screws. Spine. 2001;26:2340–6.

16. Belmont PJ, Klemme WR, Robinson M, et al. Accuracy of thoracic pedicle screws in patients with and without coronal plane spinal deformities. Spine. 2002;27:1558–66.

17. Jones EL, Heller JG, Silcox DH, et al. Cervical pedicle screws versus lateral mass screws. Anatomic feasibility and biomechanical comparison. Spine. 1997;22:977–82.

18. Mohanty SP, Pai Kanhangad M, Bhat SN, et al. Morphometry of the lower thoracic and lumbar pedicles and its relevance in pedicle fixation. Musculoskelet Surg. 2018;102:299–305.

19. Baysal Ö, Baysal T, Elmalı N, et al. Türk Toplumunda Torakal Vertebra Pedikül Çaplarının Bilgisayarlı Tomografi ile Ölçümü. İnönü Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi Derg. 2004;11:147-9.

20. Araz N. Alt Torakal ve Üst Lomber Vertebra Pediküllerinde Bilgisayarli Tomografi ile Yapilan Morfometrik Ölçümler. Ph.D. thesis, Mersin University, Mersin, 2014.

21. Ugur HC, Attar A, Uz A, et al. Thoracic pedicle: surgical anatomic evaluation and relations. J Spinal Disord. 2001;14:39–45.

22. Kim NH, Lee HM, Chung IH, et al. Morphometric study of the pedicles of thoracic and lumbar vertebrae in Koreans. Spine. 1994;19:1390–4.

23. Vaccaro AR, Rizzolo SJ, Balderston RA,et al. Placement of pedicle screws in the thoracic spine. Part II: An anatomical and radiographic assessment. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1995;77:1200–6.

24. Vaccaro AR, Rizzolo SJ, Allardyce TJ,et al. Placement of pedicle screws in the thoracic spine. Part I: Morphometric analysis of the thoracic vertebrae. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1995;77:1193–9.

25. Datir SP, Mitra SR. Morphometric Study of the Thoracic Vertebral Pedicle in an Indian Population. Spine. 2004;29:1174–81.

26. Panjabi MM, O’Holleran JD, Crisco JJ, et al. Complexity of the thoracic spine pedicle anatomy. Eur Spine J. 1997;6:19–24.
Medicine Science-Cover
  • ISSN: 2147-0634
  • Yayın Aralığı: Yılda 4 Sayı
  • Başlangıç: 2012
  • Yayıncı: Effect Publishing Agency ( EPA )
Sayıdaki Diğer Makaleler

Management of subaxial cervical spine trauma: Clinical results of early surgical decompression

Serhat YILDIZHAN, Adem ASLAN, Mehmet Gazi BOYACI, Usame RAKİP, Kamil Anıl KILINÇ

Retrospective evaluation of patients with non-varicose upper gastrointestinal bleeding

Ece ÜNAL ÇETİN, Fatih KAMIŞ, Adil Uğur ÇETİN, YAVUZ BEYAZİT

Amit Jain’s diabetic foot “PENTAGON” - a new model

Amit Kumar C. JAIN

DNA profiling for forensic identification in Bulgarian Turks

Elif CANPOLAT, Emel Hülya YÜKSELOĞLU, Fatma ÇAVUŞ YONAR, Gülten RAYİMOĞLU, Özge PASİN, Gamze GÖKSEL, ONUR ÖZTÜRK

Assessment of tongue depressor-related tongue swelling in pediatric patients with ultrasonography: A prospective, case-controlled observational study

Merih ÖNAL

The effect of marital adjustment on mother-baby bonding and breastfeeding self-efficacy level

Sümeyye ALTIPARMAK, Ayşe Nur YILMAZ, YEŞİM AKSOY DERYA

What are the best methods of airway management in COVID-19 patients?

Adel Hamed ELBAIH, Moaaz Khaled MOHAMMED

Relationships between quality of life and the idea of undergoing anesthesia in patients scheduled for elective surgery

Muhammet KORKUSUZ, Tuğsan Egemen BİLGİN

Effect of montelukast treatment on adenoid hypertrophy and sleep quality in pediatric patients

Işıl Çakmak KARAER, Ayla ÇİMEN ÖZAYDOĞDU

Evaluation of trailer attached-two wheel tractor (Pat- pat) accident - related pediatric injuries in Turkey's western black sea region

Gulseren AKPİNAR, Mehmet Cihat Demir