RADIOLOGICAL EVALUATION OF NORMAL SAGITTAL VERTEBRAL, PELVIS AND GLOBAL SPINOPELVIC PARAMETERS IN A YOUNG ADULT TURKISH POPULATION

Objective & Hypothesis:Objective: Normal values of sagittal vertebral, pelvis and global spinopelvic parameters have been reported to vary from society to society.

📊

Key Findings & Data:Materials and Methods: The study included a total of 170 subjects comprising 137 (80.6%) males and 33 (19.4%) females, with a mean age of 24.1±4.9 years.

💡

Conclusion & Impact:The results showed a negative correlation between T1SPi and PI.

🔬Design:Research Article

📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample

⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Özet

Objective: Normal values of sagittal vertebral, pelvis and global spinopelvic parameters have been reported to vary from society to society. The aim of this study was to determine these parameters in a young adult Turkish population and to evaluate the relationship between the sagittal spinopelvic measurements. This was the first study on this subject in a Turkish population. Materials and Methods: The study included a total of 170 subjects comprising 137 (80.6%) males and 33 (19.4%) females, with a mean age of 24.1±4.9 years. Anteroposterior and lateral spine X-rays and pelvis X-rays were performed to evaluate the sagittal vertebral, pelvis and global spinopelvic parameters. Patients were classified according to the Roussouly classification system to classify normal variations of the vertebrae, pelvis and sacrum in the sagittal plane. Normal distribution of the variables was examined with the Shapiro-Wilk test. The Independent Samples t-test was used in the comparison of mean values. Results: The mean and standard deviation values for sagittal vertical axis (SVA), spinopelvic inclination (T1Slop, T1SPi) , thoracic kyphosis, lumbar lordosis (LL), pelvic tilt, pelvis incidence (PI) and sacral slope values were 2.7±3.8, 13.5±7.5, -6.3±7.5, 29.6±9.8, 49.7±12.2, 11.6±7.3, 45.1±12.4 and 36.2±8.5, respectively. According to the Roussouly classification, 15.9% of the participants were classified as type 1, 32.3% type 2, 34.7% type 3, and 17.1% type 4. A statistically significant weak negative correlation was found between PI and T1SPi and a weak positive correlation was determined between PI and LL. No statistically significant correlation was determined between T1SPi and SVA. Conclusion: One hundred and eighty-seven asymptomatic young adult Turkish volunteers were evaluated in terms of some pelvic angles and the physiological standard ranges of spinal parameters defining spinal balance and the ratios were determined according to the Roussouly sagittal morphological classification. The results showed a negative correlation between T1SPi and PI.

🔖

Cite This Article

AKSEKİLİ, M. A. E., ASİLTÜRK, M., AKÇAALAN, S., AKSEKİLİ, H., ALKAN, H., DEMİR, P. (2021). RADIOLOGICAL EVALUATION OF NORMAL SAGITTAL VERTEBRAL, PELVIS AND GLOBAL SPINOPELVIC PARAMETERS IN A YOUNG ADULT TURKISH POPULATION. Journal of Turkish Spinal Surgery, Cilt: 32 - Sayı: 1, 20–25. https://ajindex.com/articles/270674

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

Open in New Tab ↗

↗New Tab

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (13)

Dubousset J. Past, present, and future in pediatric spinal surgery. Ann Transl Med. 2020;8:36
Berthonnaud E, Dimnet J, Roussouly P, Labelle H. Analysis of the sagittal balance of the spine and pelvis using shape and orientation parameters. J Spinal Disord Tech. 2005;18:40-7
Roussouly P, Berthonnaud E, Dimnet J. Geometrical and mechanical analysis of lumbar lordosis in an asymptomatic population: proposed classification. Rev Chir Orthop Reparatrice Appar Mot. 2003;89:632-9
Schwab F, Patel A, Ungar B, Farcy JP, Lafage V. Adult spinal deformity postoperative standing imbalance: how much can you tolerate? an overview of key parameters in assessing alignment and planning corrective surgery. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2010;35:2224-31
Faro FD, Marks MC, Pawelek J, Newton PO. Evaluation of a functional position for lateral radiograph acquisition in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2004;29:2284-9
Horton WC, Brown CW, Bridwell KH, Glassman SD, Suk SI, Cha CW. Is there an optimal patient stance for obtaining a lateral 36” radiograph? A critical comparison of three techniques. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2005;30:427-33
Akbar M, Terran J, Ames CP, Lafage V, Schwab F. Use of Surgimap Spine in sagittal plane analysis, osteotomy planning, and correction calculation. Neurosurg Clin N. 2013;24:163-72
Lafage R, Ferrero E, Henry JK, Challier V, Diebo B, Liabaud B, et al. Validation of a new computer-assisted tool to measure spino-pelvic parameters. Spine J. 2015;15:2493-502
Vaz G, Roussouly P, Berthonnaud E, Dimnet J. Sagittal morphology and equilibrium of pelvis and spine. Eur Spine. 2002;11:80-7
Kassambara A. “ggpubr: ‘ggplot2’ based publication ready plots. 2020. URL:
Signorell A, Aho K, Alfons A, Anderegg N, Aragon T, Arachige C, et al. Tools for Descriptive Statistics. 2020. URL:
Alpar R. Spor, sağlık ve eğitim bilimlerinden örneklerle uygulamalı istatistik ve geçerlik-güvenirlik. Detay Yayıncılık. 2010 13. Janssen MM, Drevelle X, Humbert L, Skalli W, Castelein RM. Differences in male and female spino-pelvic alignment in asymptomatic young adults: a three-dimensional analysis using upright low-dose digital biplanar X-rays. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2009;34:826-32
Roussouly P, Gollogly S, Berthonnaud E, Dimnet J. Classification of the normal variation in the sagittal alignment of the human lumbar spine and pelvis in the sta