| Literature DB >> 29147657 |
Soyeon Kim1, Dai-Soon Kwak1, In-Beom Kim1.
Abstract
A thorough understanding of the morphology of the lamina of the second cervical vertebra (C2) is important for safe C2 translaminar screw placement. Although anatomical characteristics of the C2 lamina have been widely documented, individual differences in morphology have not been addressed. The aim of this study was to morphometrically analyze the cross-sectional shape of the C2 lamina and classify the shape to describe individual differences. Morphometric analysis was conducted on 145 three-dimensional C2 models based on computerized tomography images from Korean adult cadavers. Several parameters were measured on a cross-section image of the lamina model. Based on numerical criteria, all of the C2 lamina's cross-sectional shapes could be categorized into three distinctive morphological types: pyriform, ellipse, and obpyriform shapes. We confirmed that most Koreans can accommodate C2 translaminar screw placement with a lower limit of the 95% confidence interval of thickness measured at 6.26 mm. Morphometric analysis suggested that the obpyriform-shaped lamina (4.48%) is likely to require screw trajectory adjustment to avoid cortical breakout of the screw. Our results will enhance current anatomical understanding of the C2 lamina and thus facilitate safer C2 translaminar screw placement.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2017 PMID: 29147657 PMCID: PMC5632859 DOI: 10.1155/2017/7276946
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biomed Res Int Impact factor: 3.411
Figure 1Acquisition of section shapes of the lamina on a 3D model of the C2.
Figure 2Measurement parameters, WS: width at 25% of the height from the top of the lamina; WI: width at 75% of the height from the top of the lamina.
Figure 3Classification tree for determination of section shape type, WS: width at 25% of the height from the top of the lamina; WI: width at 75% of the height from the top of the lamina.
Morphometric parameters of the C2 lamina in the study population.
| Parameters | Female | Male | Combined |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thickness (mm) | 6.4 ± 1.3 | 7.1 ± 1.1 | 6.82 ± 1.2 | <0.001 |
| Diameter (mm) | 6.0 ± 1.3 | 6.7 ± 1.1 | 6.39 ± 1.2 | <0.001 |
| Height (mm) | 12.7 ± 1.4 | 14.1 ± 1.3 | 13.5 ± 1.5 | <0.001 |
| Center (%) | 56.9 ± 7.2 | 57.7 ± 8.0 | 57.3 ± 7.7 | 0.356 |
Figure 4Types of cross-section shapes of the lamina: (a) pyriform shape (43.45%); (b) elliptical shape (52.07%); (c) obpyriform shape (4.48%).
Figure 5Asymmetric laminas (54 of 145 axes): (a) ellipse (L) and pyriform (R) (45 of 145 axes); (b) pyriform (L) and obpyriform (R) (9 of 145 axes).
Comparison of morphometric parameters of the C2 lamina across studies.
| Population | Specimens | Thickness | Thickness | 95% CI | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |||||
| Cassinelli et al. (2006) | American | 420 | 5.77 ± 1.31 | 70.5 | Null |
|
| |||||
| Wang (2006) | American | 38 | 6.30 ± 1.30 | 79 | Null |
|
| |||||
| Kim et al. (2008) | Korean | 102 | 5.66 ± 1.02 | 61.3 | Null |
|
| |||||
| Ma et al. (2010) | Chinese | 120 | 5.87 ± 1.29 | 83.3 | Null |
|
| |||||
| Bhatnagar et al. (2010) | American | 50 | 5.50 ± 1.40 | 94 | Null |
|
| |||||
| Hu et al. (2010) | Chinese (Han) | 28 | 6.70 ± 1.50 | “Bulk” | Null |
|
| |||||
| Xin-Yu et al. (2011) | Chinese | 96 | 6.20 ± 5.20 | 85 | Null |
| 112 | 6.60 ± 1.50 | ||||
|
| |||||
| Yusof and Shamsi (2012) | Malaysian | 98 | 5.60 ± 1.20 | 75.5 | Null |
|
| |||||
| Sharma et al. (2015) | Indian | 38 | 5.17 ± 1.42 | 36.9 | Null |
| (CT scans) | 5.57 ± 1.28 | NA | |||
|
| |||||
| Saetia and Phankhongsab (2015) | Thai | 200 | 6.64 ± 1.36 | 79 | Null |