| Literature DB >> 28577531 |
Xiao-Bo Wang1, Xin Zheng2, Hou-Qing Long3,4, Wen-Li Chen5, Xing Cheng1, Yang-Liang Huang1, Jing-Hui Xu1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The application of laminar screws is an alternative fixation for the first thoracic vertebra (T1). This paper is to determine the anatomical characteristics for adequate laminar screw fixation, and present a modified method of sagittal reconstruction of T1 to provide more accurate measurements.Entities:
Keywords: CT scan; Laminar screw; Radiographic parameters; Upper thoracic spine
Mesh:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28577531 PMCID: PMC5457552 DOI: 10.1186/s12891-017-1604-3
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Musculoskelet Disord ISSN: 1471-2474 Impact factor: 2.362
Fig. 1Measurements of T1 on a transverse computed tomography (CT). a L: length based on the ideal laminar screw trajectory. A: the axial angle between the ideal laminar screw trajectory and the midline. W: the minimal outer cortical width. Ws: the minimal cancellous width. b Minimal outer cortical width (T) measured in the sagittal reconstruction at the middle 1/3 narrowest lamina. c The spinous process height (H) obtained at the site of the cross-point of the bilateral ideal laminar screw trajectory in the coronal plane
Fig. 2a Process for creating the modified sagittal reconstruction. b Minimal outer cortical (T) and cancellous heights (Ts) obtained at the narrowest point of the lamina in the modified sagittal reconstruction. c Spinous process height (H) was measured at the cross-point of the bilateral ideal laminar screw placement in the modified sagittal reconstruction
Measurements in T1 stratified by side of screw placement and patient’s sexa
| Measurements | Total | Male | Female | t | P | Left | Right | t | P |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| L (mm) | 32.8 ± 3.2 | 34.8 ± 2.8 | 30.7 ± 2.1 | 9.405 |
| 32.6 ± 3.3 | 33.0 ± 3.3 | -1.971 |
|
| W (mm) | 7.4 ± 1.3 | 8.1 ± 1.2 | 6.7 ± .1.1 | 6.811 |
| 7.4 ± 1.3 | 7.4 ± 1.3 | -0.128 |
|
| Ws (mm) | 4.4 ± 0.9 | 4.8 ± 0.9 | 3.8 ± 0.6 | 7.101 |
| 4.3 ± 0.9 | 4.4 ± 0.9 | -1.772 |
|
| A (°) | 48.6 ± 3.5 | 47.2 ± 3.2 | 50.1 ± 3.2 | -5.044 |
| 48.7 ± 3.2 | 48.5 ± 3.9 | 0.243 |
|
| T (mm) | 10.8 ± 2.1 | 11.9 ± 2.0 | 9.6 ± 1.5 | 7.452 |
| 10.7 ± 2.2 | 10.8 ± 2.0 | -0.276 |
|
| MT (mm) | 10.1 ± 2.3 | 11.3 ± 2.2 | 8.8 ± 1.5 | 7.293 |
| 9.9 ± 2.3 | 10.2 ± 2.2 | -0.572 |
|
| Ts (mm) | 6.1 ± 1.6 | 6.6 ± 1.7 | 5.5 ± 1.3 | 3.772 |
| 6.0 ± 1.6 | 6.1 ± 1.7 | -0.998 |
|
| MTs (mm) | 5.8 ± 1.7 | 6.3 ± 1.8 | 5.2 ± 1.3 | 3.961 |
| 5.6 ± 1.6 | 5.9 ± 1.7 | -1.399 |
|
| H (mm) | 13.5 ± 1.4 | 14.0 ± 1.3 | 12.8 ± 1.2 | 5.184 |
| 13.4 ± 1.4 | 13.5 ± 1.4 | -1.447 |
|
| MH (mm) | 13.6 ± 1.6 | 14.1 ± 1.5 | 13.0 ± 1.4 | 4.222 |
| 13.6 ± 1.6 | 13.6 ± 1.6 | -1.616 |
|
aThe laminar screw length (L), the minimal outer cortical width (W), the minimal cancellous width (Ws), the minimal outer cortical height (T, MT), the minimal cancellous height (Ts, MTs), the axis angle (A) and the spinous process height (H, MH) in T1 are reported as ±S. T, Ts, and H were measured in the sagittal reconstruction, while the MT, MTs, and MH were measured in the modified sagittal reconstruction.
The minimal outer cortical height (T), the minimal cancellous height (Ts) and the spinous process height (H) stratified by sagittal and modified sagittal reconstructionsa
| Measurements | sagittal | Modified sagittal | t | P |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| T | 10.8 ± 2.1 | 10.1 ± 1.7 | 15.553 |
|
| Ts | 6.1 ± 1.6 | 5.7 ± 1.7 | 13.587 |
|
| H | 13.5 ± 2.3 | 13.6 ± 1.6 | -1.256 |
|
aThe three parameters were report as ±S.
Comparison of the T1 laminar morphology with the literature dataa
| Measurements | Groups | Present study | Modified sagittal reconstruction | Patel, | Molina, | Hu, | Kretzer, |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Patient’s age | 20-70 years old | 20-70 years old | 8-18 years old | 2-16 years old | 19-78 years old | >18 years old | |
| L | Total | 32.8 ± 3.2 | 29.9 ± 4.1 | 30.8 ± 3.4 | 33.4 ± 3.6 | ||
| Males | 34.8 ± 2.7 | 30.6 ± 4.2 | 31.9 | 32.0 ± 3.2 | 34.7 ± 3.6 | ||
| Females | 30.7 ± 2.1 | 29.1 ± 4.0 | 28.9 | 29.6 ± 3.1 | 32.0 ± 3.0 | ||
| W | Total | 7.4 ± 1.3 | 6.5 ± 1.3 | 6.2 ± 1.0 | 6.6 ± 1.1 | ||
| Males | 8.1 ± 1.2 | 6.6 ± 1.4 | 5.7 | 6.5 ± 0.8 | 6.9 ± 1.1 | ||
| Females | 6.7 ± 1.1 | 6.4 ± 1.2 | 4.8 | 5.9 ± 1.0 | 6.3 ± 1.0 | ||
| Ws | Total | 4.4 ± 0.9 | 3.4 ± 1.0 | 3.7 ± 1.0 | |||
| Males | 4.8 ± 0.9 | 2.4 | 3.6 ± 1.1 | 4.0 ± 1.0 | |||
| Females | 3.8 ± 0.6 | 2.0 | 3.2 ± 0.9 | 3.3 ± 0.9 | |||
| A | Total | 48.6 ± 3.5 | 47 ± 4 | 99.9 ± 3.6 | 49.2 ± 3.7 | ||
| Males | 47.2 ± 3.2 | 47 ± 4 | 50.0 | 99.6 ± 4.2 | 49.1 ± 4.0 | ||
| Females | 50.1 ± 3.2 | 46 ± 4 | 50.0 | 100.2 ± 3.1 | 49.3 ± 3.4 | ||
| T | Total | 10.8 ± 2.1 | 10.1 ± 2.3 | 12.3 ± 3.4 | 16.9 ± 1.3 | ||
| Males | 11.9 ± 2.0 | 11.3 ± 2.2 | 11.8 ± 3.4 | 17.6 ± 1.3 | |||
| Females | 9.6 ± 1.5 | 8.8 ± 1.5 | 12.8 ± 3.3 | 16.4 ± 1.0 | |||
| Ts | Total | 6.1 ± 1.6 | 5.7 ± 1.7 | ||||
| Males | 6.6 ± 1.7 | 6.3 ± 1.8 | 11.4 | ||||
| Females | 5.5 ± 1.3 | 5.2 ± 1.3 | 10.3 | ||||
| H | Total | 13.5 ± 1.4 | 13.6 ± 1.6 | ||||
| Males | 14.0 ± 1.3 | 14.1 ± 1.5 | |||||
| Females | 12.8 ± 1.2 | 13.0 ± 1.4 |
aThe translaminar screw length (L), the minimal outer cortical width (W), the minimal cancellous width (Ws), the minimal outer cortical height (T), the minimal cancellous height (Ts), the axis angle (A) and the spinous process height (H) in T1 are reported as ±S.
[b] Patel AJ, Cherian J, Fulkerson DH, Fox BD, Chern JJ, Whitehead WE, Curry DJ, Luerssen TG, Jea A (2011) Computed tomography morphometric analysis for translaminar screw fixation in the upper thoracic spine of the pediatric population. Journal of neurosurgery Pediatrics 7 (4):383-388.
[c] Molina C, Sciubba DM, Chaput C, Tortolani PJ, Jallo GI, Kretzer RM (2012) A computed tomography-based feasibility study of translaminar screw placement in the pediatric thoracic spine. Journal of neurosurgery Pediatrics 9 (1):27-34.
[d] Hu QF, Xu RM, Pan H, Zhou H, Lei W (2015) Translaminar Screw Fixation in the Upper Thoracic Spine: Computed Tomography-Based Quantitative Laminar Analysis and Feasibility Study of Translaminar Virtual Screw Placement. Cell biochemistry and biophysics 2015, 73(1): 191-198.
[e] Kretzer RM, Chaput C, Sciubba DM, Garonzik IM, Jallo GI, McAfee PC, Cunningham BW, Tortolani PJ (2010) A computed tomography-based feasibility study of translaminar screw fixation in the upper thoracic spine. Journal of neurosurgery Spine 12 (3):286-292.