EN | TR
E-ISSN: 2147-2653
The Evaluation of Paraspinal Markers in the Numbering of the Lumbosacral Transitional Vertebrae
PDF
Cite
Share
Request
Original Investigation
VOLUME: 25 ISSUE: 2
P: 72-77
August 2019

The Evaluation of Paraspinal Markers in the Numbering of the Lumbosacral Transitional Vertebrae

Turk J Osteoporos 2019;25(2):72-77
DOI: 10.4274/tod.galenos.2019.71676
Mehmet Beyazal 1
Münevver Serdaroğlu Beyazal 2
Maksude Esra Kadıoğlu 1
Fatma Beyazal Çeliker 1
1. Recep Tayyip Erdoğan Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi, Radyoloji Anabilim Dalı, Rize, Türkiye
2. Recep Tayyip Erdoğan Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi, Fiziksel Tıp ve Rehabilitasyon Anabilim Dalı, Rize, Türkiye
No information available.
No information available
Received Date: 13.12.2018
Accepted Date: 11.03.2019
Publish Date: 12.07.2019
PDF
Cite
Share
Request

ABSTRACT

Objective:

Lumbosacral transitional vertebrae (TV) are a common congenital anomaly and known to be associated with chronic low back pain. The purpose of this study is to reveal the value of the paraspinal markers such as celiac artery (CA), superior mesenteric artery (SMA), right renal artery (RRA) origins, abdominal aorta bifurcation (AAB), and iliolumbar ligament (IL) in the correct numbering of lumbosacral TV on computed tomography (CT) imaging.

Materials and Methods:

The cases with aged from 18-65 years who underwent the whole-body CT imaging between the dates January 2015 and December 2017 were assessed retrospectively.

Results:

Of the 380 cases (age 53.4±10.8 years; 164 women and 216 men) included in the study, 51 (13.4%) had TV. A significant difference was determined in terms of the level of CA, SMA, RRA origin, AAB, and IL between the cases with TV and normal spinal segmentation (p<0.001).

Conclusion:

There are significant differences in terms of the localization of the CA, SMA, RRA origins, AAB, and IL levels between the subjects with normal spinal segmentation and TV. Therefore, the use of these marks may result in inaccuracy of the vertebral numbering.

References

1
Tokgoz N, Ucar M, Erdogan AB, Kilic K, Ozcan C. Are spinal or paraspinal anatomic markers helpful for vertebral numbering and diagnosing lumbosacral transitional vertebrae? Korean J Radiol 2014;15:258-66.
2
Lian J, Levine N, Cho W. A review of lumbosacral transitional vertebrae and associated vertebral numeration. Eur Spine J 2018;27:995-1004.
3
Jagannathan D, Indiran V, Hithaya F, Alamelu M, Padmanaban S. Role of Anatomical Landmarks in Identifying Normal and Transitional Vertebra in Lumbar Spine Magnetic Resonance Imaging. Asian Spine J 2017;11:365-79.
4
Paik NC, Lim CS, Jang HS. Numeric and morphological verification of lumbosacral segments in 8280 consecutive patients. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2013;38:E573-8.
5
French HD, Somasundaram AJ, Schaefer NR, Laherty RW. Lumbosacral transitional vertebrae and its prevalence in the Australian population. Global Spine J 2014;4:229-32.
6
Dzupa V, Slepanek M, Striz M, Krbec M, Chmelova J, Kachlik D, et al. Developmental malformations in the area of the lumbosacral transitional vertebrae and sacrum: differences in gender and left/right distribution. Surg Radiol Anat 2014;36:689-93.
7
Illeez OG, Atıcı A, Ulger EB, Kulcu DG, Ozkan FU, Aktas I. The transitional vertebra and sacroiliac joint dysfunction association. Eur Spine J 2018;27:187-93.
8
Konin GP, Walz DM. Lumbosacral transitional vertebrae: classification, imaging findings, and clinical relevance. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2010;31:1778-86.
9
Nardo L, Alizai H, Virayavanich W, Liu F, Hernandez A, Lynch JA, et al. Lumbosacral transitional vertebrae: association with low back pain. Radiology 2012;265:497-503.
10
Aihara T, Takahashi K, Ogasawara A, Itadera E, Ono Y, Moriya H. Intervertebral disc degeneration associated with lumbosacral transitional vertebrae: a clinical and anatomical study. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2005;87:687-91.
11
Castellvi AE, Goldstein LA, Chan DP. Lumbosacral transitional vertebrae and their relationship with lumbar extradural defects. Spine 1984;9:493-5.
12
Tang M, Yang XF, Yang SW, Han P, Ma YM, Yu H, et al. Lumbosacral transitional vertebra in a population-based study of 5860 individuals: prevalence and relationship to low back pain. Eur J Radiol 2014;83:1679-82.
13
Hughes RJ, Saifuddin A. Numbering of lumbosacral transitional vertebrae on MRI: role of the iliolumbar ligaments. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2006;187:W59-65.
14
Tins BJ, Balain B. Incidence of numerical variants and transitional lumbosacral vertebrae on whole-spine MRI. Insights Imaging 2016;7:199-203.
15
Farshad-Amacker NA, Aichmair A, Herzog RJ, Farshad M. Merits of different anatomical landmarks for correct numbering of the lumbar vertebrae in lumbosacral transitional anomalies. Eur Spine J 2015;24:600-8.
16
Lee CH, Seo BK, Choi YC, Shin HJ, Park JH, Jeon HJ, et al. Using MRI to evaluate anatomic significance of aortic bifurcation, right renal artery, and conus medullaris when locating lumbar vertebral segments. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2004;182:1295-300.
17
Tureli D, Ekinci G, Baltacioglu F. Is any landmark reliable in vertebral enumeration? A study of 3.0-Tesla lumbar MRI comparing skeletal, neural, and vascular markers. Clin Imaging 2014;38:792-6.
18
Farshad-Amacker NA, Lurie B, Herzog RJ, Farshad M. Is the iliolumbar ligament a reliable identifier of the L5 vertebra in lumbosacral transitional anomalies? Eur Radiol 2014;24:2623-30.