| Literature DB >> 27904724 |
Min Geun Yoon1, Myung-Sang Moon1, Bong Keun Park1, Hohyoung Lee1, Dong-Hyeon Kim1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The sacrococcygeal morphology of Arabs and Europeans has been studied using computed tomography (CT) or magnetic resonance imaging to determine the cause of coccydynia. Studies have suggested differences in sacrococcygeal morphology among ethnic groups. However, there are no data on the sacrococcygeal anatomy of Koreans.Entities:
Keywords: Coccyx; Computed X-ray tomography; Koreans; Morphology; Sacrum
Mesh:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27904724 PMCID: PMC5114254 DOI: 10.4055/cios.2016.8.4.412
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Clin Orthop Surg ISSN: 2005-291X
Parameters of Sacrococcygeal Anatomy and Definition of Each Parameter
| Parameter | Definition of parameter |
|---|---|
| Morphology | |
| 1. No. of coccygeal segment | Unfused segment(s) of the coccyx |
| 2. Type of coccyx* | Type 1: slightly curved coccyx pointing downwards |
| Type 2: more curved coccyx pointing forwards | |
| Type 3: sharply angulated at intercoccygeal joint | |
| Type 4: subluxation at the sacrococcygeal or first intercoccygeal joint | |
| Type 5: retroversion of the coccyx | |
| 3. Fusion of sacrococcygeal joint* | Continuation of the anterior and posterior cortices between the sacrum and the coccyx |
| Morphometry | |
| 1. Curved index of coccyx and sacrum* | 100 – (straight length divided by curved length × 100) |
| 2. The sacrococcygeal angle* | The angle between a line from the midpoint of the S1 upper endplate to the midpoint of the S5 lower endplate and a line from the midpoint of the S5 lower endplate to the tip of the last coccygeal segment |
| 3. The intercoccygeal angle* | The angle between an intersecting line of the first coccygeal segment and an intersecting line of the last two coccygeal segments |
*The parameters and definitions are derived from previous reports.131415)
Fig. 1Computed tomography images showing morphology of the sacrococcygeal region. (A) The coccygeal type is classified according to the angle between a line from the center of the first coccygeal segment to the tip of the last coccygeal segment and a vertical line. (B) Sacrococcygeal fusion (circle) is noted.
Fig. 2Computed tomography images for morphometry of the sacrococcygeal region. (A) Straight (solid line) and curved (dotted line) lengths of each sacrum and coccyx. (B) Sacrococcygeal angle. (C) Intercoccygeal angle.
The Number of Subjects at Each Decade for This Study
| Decade | Male | Female | Total |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2nd | 17 (63) | 10 (37) | 27 |
| 3rd | 37 (50) | 37 (50) | 74 |
| 4th | 47 (61) | 30 (39) | 77 |
| 5th | 33 (52) | 31 (48) | 64 |
| 6th | 50 (51) | 48 (49) | 98 |
| 7th | 32 (41) | 47 (59) | 79 |
| 8th | 24 (22) | 83 (78) | 107 |
| 9th–10th | 8 (10) | 72 (90) | 80 |
| Total | 248 (41) | 358 (59) | 606 |
Values are presented as number (%).
Morphologic Differences between Male and Female
| Variable | Male | Female | |
|---|---|---|---|
| No. of coccygeal segment(s) | 0.231 | ||
| 5 | 12 (5) | 7 (2) | |
| 4 | 158 (66.1)* | 221 (63.9)* | |
| 3 | 63 (26.4) | 106 (30.6) | |
| 2 | 5 (2.1) | 11 (3.2) | |
| 1 | 1 (0.4) | 1 (0.3) | |
| Coccyx type | 0.126 | ||
| I | 67 (27) | 99 (27.7) | |
| II | 113 (45.6)* | 196 (54.7)* | |
| III | 46 (18.5) | 43 (12) | |
| IV | 14 (5.6) | 13 (3.6) | |
| V | 1 (0.4) | 0 | |
| Sacrococcygeal fusion | 66 (27.5) | 97 (33.9) | 0.283 |
*Four coccygeal segments and type II coccyx were most common in Koreans.
Morphologic Differences among Decades
| Variable | Decade | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2nd | 3rd | 4th | 5th | 6th | 7th | 8th | 9th–10th | ||
| No. of coccygeal segments | 0.007 | ||||||||
| 4 | 21 (84.0) | 50 (68.5) | 39 (52.0) | 45 (77.6) | 59 (62.1) | 53 (68.8) | 63 (61.2)* | 49 (62.0)* | |
| 3 | 3 (12.0) | 21 (28.8) | 29 (38.7) | 9 (15.5) | 28 (29.5) | 23 (29.9) | 38 (36.9) | 18 (22.8) | |
| Type | 0.015 | ||||||||
| II | 14 (51.9) | 34 (45.9) | 38 (49.4) | 29 (45.3) | 51 (52.0) | 48 (60.8) | 57 (53.3) | 38 (47.5) | |
| I | 6 (22.2) | 14 (18.9) | 16 (20.8) | 16 (25.0) | 29 (29.6) | 21 (26.6) | 32 (29.9)* | 32 (40.0)* | |
| Sacrococcygeal fusion | 2 (7.4) | 22 (29.7) | 28 (36.4) | 17 (26.6) | 31 (31.6) | 22 (27.8) | 41 (38.3)* | 37 (46.3)* | 0.02 |
Values are presented as number (%).
*Over 8th decade, rate of four coccygeal segments decreased and rate of type I and sacrococcygeal fusion increased.
Morphometric Differences between Genders and among Decades
| Variable | Between genders | Among decades | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Male | Female | Pearson correlation ( | |||
| Curved index of coccyx | 8.89 ± 6.05* | 6.26 ± 4.99 | 0.000 | 0.000 | –0.257 |
| Curved index of sacrum | 5.28 ± 2.65 | 6.83 ± 3.8* | 0.000 | 0.000 | 0.493 |
| Sacrococcygeal angle (°) | 110.5 ± 11.8 | 108.9 ± 12.5 | 0.201 | 0.000 | 0.210 |
| Intercoccygeal angle (°) | 53.9 ± 20 | 44.7 ± 21.6* | 0.000 | 0.000 | –0.187 |
*The coccyx was more curved and the sacrum was straighter in males than females.
Fig. 3In a 92-year-old female patient, the sacrum is curved (dotted line) and the coccyx is straight. Type I coccyx (angle) and sacrococcygeal fusion (circle) are noted.
Fig. 4Differences in sacrococcygeal anatomy between a male (A) and a female (B). In the female, the sacrum is more curved and the coccyx is straighter than in the male.