Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Anatomic basis of anterior and posterior instrumentation of the spine: morphometric study

  • Anatomic Variations
  • Published:
Surgical and Radiologic Anatomy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Study design

A morphometric study of the linear and angular parameters of the spinal vertebra was conducted by computerized tomographic scans and comparison with previous studies in literature.

Objectives

Detailed knowledge of the spinal vertebral morphometry is important for proper instrumentation. The morphologic measurements vary among races. Morphometric studies have been conducted in white populations. This study aims to suggest dimensions for anterior and posterior spinal implants and to improve the instrumentation techniques.

Materials and methods

The vertebral pedicles, bodies and intervertebral disc spaces of the subaxial cervical, thoracic and lumbar spine were studied in 48 healthy individuals by computerized tomographic scan methods. The following parameters were studied: pedicle length, pedicle width, transverse pedicle angle (TPA), sagittal pedicle angle, anterior corpus height, posterior corpus height, anterior disc height, middle disc height and posterior disc height.

Results

Our results were slightly different compared to previous studies. Individual differences were found in the same subgroups. The transverse pedicle diameter was largest at L5 (14.95 mm) and smallest at C3 (5.1 mm). The pedicle was longest at L5 (19.9 mm) and shortest at T10 (15.7).The TPA was largest at C3 (47.6°) and smallest at T6 (11.3°). The vertebral body was largest at L5 (34.9 mm) and smallest at C3 and C5 (15.6 mm). The vertebral body width was largest at L5 (46.6 mm) and smallest at C4 (22 mm). The intervertebral disc space height was largest at L2–3 (10 mm) and smallest at T1–2 (2.85 mm). There were no significant differences between the left and right sides.

Conclusions

In our morphometric study of the spinal vertebrae, we found differences compared to a number of previous morphometric studies performed mainly on a white population. Also, we documented the individual morphometric differences of the same parameters in the same subgroups. These results emphasize the importance of preoperative computed tomography and conventional radiography of each patient in planning a surgical procedure and selecting the appropriate size of the instruments, thus avoiding possible postoperative complication related to implants.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Abumi K, Kaneda K, Shono Y et al (1999) One-stage posterior decompression and reconstruction of the cervical spine by using pedicle screw fixation systems. J Neurosurg 90:19–26

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Abumi K, Itoh H, Taneichi H et al (1994) Transpedicular screw fixation for traumatic lesions of the middle and lower cervical spine: description of the techniques and preliminary report. J Spinal Disord 7:19–28

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Abumi K, Panjabi MM, Duranceau J et al (1989) Biomechanical evaluation of spinal fixation devices. III. Stability provided by six spinal fixation devices and interbody bone graft. Spine 14:1249–1255

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Borne GM, Bedou GL, Pinaudeau M (1984) Treatment of pedicular fractures of the axis: a clinical study and screw fixation technique. J Neurosurg 60:88–93

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Ebraheim NA, Fow J, Xu R et al (1998) The vertebral body depths of the cervical spine and its relation to anterior plate-screw fixation. Spine 23:2299–2302

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Ebraheim NA, Rollins JR, Xu R, Yeasting RA (1996) Projection of the lumbar pedicle and its morphometric analysis. Spine 21:1296–1300

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Ebraheim NA, Xu R, Ahmad M, Yeasting RA (1997) Projection of the thoracic pedicle and its morphometric analysis. Spine 22:233–238

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Ebraheim NA, Xu R, Knight T et al (1997) Morphometric evaluation of lower pedicle and its projection. Spine 22:16

    Google Scholar 

  9. Gertzbein SD, Robbins SE (1990) Accuracy of pedicular screw placement in vivo. Spine 15:11–14

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Husted DS, Haims AH, Fairchild TA et al (2004) Morphometric comparison of the pedicle rib unit to pedicles in the thoracic spine. Spine 29:139–146

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Jeanneret B, Geghard JS, Margerl F (1994) Transpedicular screw fixation of articular mass fracture-separation: results of an anatomical study and operative technique. J Spinal Disord 7:22–29

    Google Scholar 

  12. Karaikovic EE, Daubs MD, Madsen RW et al (1997) Morphologic characteristics of human cervical pedicles. Spine 22:493–500

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Krag MH, Beynnon BD, Pope MH et al (1985) An internal fixator for posterior application to short segments of the thoracic, lumbar, or lumbosacral spine. Clin Orthop Relat Res 203:75–98

    Google Scholar 

  14. Krag MH, Weaver DL, Beynnon BD et al (1988) Morphometry of the thoracic and lumbar spine related to transpedicular screw placement for surgical spinal fixation. Spine 13:27–32

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Lien SB, Liou NH, Wu SS (2007) Analysis of anatomic morphometry of the pedicles and the safe zone for through-pedicle procedures in the thoracic and lumbar spine. Eur Spine J 16:1215–1222

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Louis R (1986) Fusion of the lumbar and sacral spine by internal fixation with screw plates. Clin Orthop Relat Res 203:18–33

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Lu J, Ebraheim NA, Yang H et al (1999) Anatomic bases for anterior spinal surgery: surgical anatomy of the cervical vertebral body and disc space. Surg Radiol Anat 21:235–239

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Ludwig SC, Kramer DL, Balderston RA et al (2000) Placement of pedicle screws in the human cadaveric cervical spine: comparative accuracy of three techniques. Spine 25:1655–1667

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Oh SH, Perin NI, Cooper PR (1996) Quantitative three-dimensional anatomy of the subaxial cervical spine: implication for anterior spinal surgery. Neurosurgery 38:1139–1144

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Olsewski JM, Simmons EH, Kallen FC et al (1990) Morphometry of the lumbar spine: anatomical perspectives related to transpedicular fixation. J Bone Joint Surg 72A:541–549

    Google Scholar 

  21. Panjabi MM, Duranceau J, Goel V et al (1991) Cervical human vertebrae. Quantitative three-dimensional anatomy of the middle and lower regions. Spine 16:861–869

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Panjabi MM, Goel V, Oxland T et al (1992) Human lumbar vertebrae: quantitative three-dimensional anatomy. Spine 17:299–306

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Panjabi MM, Takata K, Goel V et al (1991) Thoracic human vertebrae. Quantitative three-dimensional anatomy. Spine 16:888–901

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Reinhold M, Magerl F, Rieger M et al (2007) Cervical pedicle screw placement: feasibility and accuracy of two new insertion techniques based on morphometric data. Eur Spine J 16:47–56

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Roy-Camille R, Saillant G, Mazel C (1986) Internal fixation of the lumbar spine with pedicle screw plating. Clin Orthop Relat Res 203:7–17

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Roy-Camille R, Saillant G, Mazel C (1989) Internal fixation of the unstable cervical spine by a posterior osteosynthesis with plates and screws. In: Cervical Spine Research Society (ed) The cervical spine, 2nd edn. Lippincott, Philadelphia, pp 390–403

  27. Ugur HC, Attar A, Uz A et al (2000) Surgical anatomic evaluation of the cervical pedicle and adjacent neural structures. Neurosurgery 47:116–128

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Weinstein JN, Spratt KF, Spengler D et al (1988) Spinal pedicle fixation: reliability and validity of roentgenogram-based assessment and surgical factors on successful screw placement. Spine 13:1012–1018

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Zindrick MR, Wiltse LL, Doornik A et al (1987) Analysis of the morphometric characteristics of the thoracic and lumbar pedicles. Spine 12:160–166

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgment

We greatly appreciate the valuable help of Odhan Yuksel MD in the statistical analysis of the values of the parameters.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Neurosurgery, Cerrahpasa Medical Faculty, Istanbul University, K.M. Pasa, 34098, Istanbul, Turkey

    Bashar Abuzayed, Banu Tutunculer, Baris Kucukyuruk & Saffet Tuzgen

Authors
  1. Bashar Abuzayed
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Banu Tutunculer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Baris Kucukyuruk
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Saffet Tuzgen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Bashar Abuzayed.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Abuzayed, B., Tutunculer, B., Kucukyuruk, B. et al. Anatomic basis of anterior and posterior instrumentation of the spine: morphometric study. Surg Radiol Anat 32, 75–85 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00276-009-0545-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00276-009-0545-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation