| Literature DB >> 34353977 |
Ghaliya Al Hinai1, Mai Al Shandoodi2, Srinivasa Rao Sirasanagandla3, Salwa Al Sarhani4, Humoud Al Dhuhli4, Sanjay Jaju5, Mohamed Al Mushaiqri3.
Abstract
The atlas (C1) is known to present congenital anomalies in its anterior and posterior arches. The reported incidence of C1 anomalies is varied among the ethnic groups. We sought to determine the prevalence and various existing variations of C1 arch congenital anomalies in Omani subjects. This study was carried out by reviewing the cervical spine computed tomography scans of all the patients who had been referred to the Radiology Department, Sultan Qaboos University Hospital. Descriptive statistics and chi-square test were employed to analyse the data. A total of 663 subjects aged ≥18 years were included in the present study. Overall prevalence of C1 arch anomalies was 4.37% with 4.07% of isolated posterior arch anomalies, 0.3% of combined anterior and posterior arch anomalies. Among isolated posterior arch anomalies, type A and type B posterior arch defects were found in 3.77% and 0.3% of cases, respectively. Atlanto-occipital assimilation was noted in one case of total study subjects. The prevalence rate of C1 arch anomalies is relatively high in Omani subjects. The baseline data of C1 arch anomalies reported in the present study has a great impact on clinical practice, due to the fact that studying and evaluating the types of congenital anomalies helps in their accurate diagnosis and early intervention.Entities:
Keywords: Cervical vertebrae; Diagnosis; Prevalence; Radiology; Spine
Year: 2021 PMID: 34353977 PMCID: PMC8693139 DOI: 10.5115/acb.21.101
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Anat Cell Biol ISSN: 2093-3665
Fig. 1Three dimensional reconstructed computed tomography scan showing the type A (A), type B (B) posterior arch defects, and combined anterior and posterior arch defect (C). The posterior view (B) of atlanto-occipital assimilation (D) is also seen.
Age distribution of atlas arch anomalies
| Age group (yr) | Absence of anomalies | Presence of anomalies | Total |
|---|---|---|---|
| 18–30 | 273 (94.8) | 15 (5.2) | 288 |
| 31–40 | 159 (95.8) | 7 (4.2) | 166 |
| 41–50 | 69 (93.2) | 5 (6.8) | 74 |
| 51–60 | 61 (98.4) | 1 (1.6) | 62 |
| 61–70 | 38 (97.4) | 1 (2.6) | 39 |
| 71–80 | 24 (100) | 0 (0) | 24 |
| ≥81 | 10 (100) | 0 (0) | 10 |
Values are presented as number (%).
Prevalence of different types of posterior arch anomalies in different studies
| Authors | Country of study | Screening method | Type A | Type B | Type C | Type D | Type E |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Currarinoe et al. [ | United States | CT scan | 3%–4% | 0.69% | - | - | - |
| Geipel [ | NA | Autopsy | 4% | - | - | - | - |
| Senoglu et al. [ | United States | CT scan, bone, autopsy | 2.60% | 0.54% | - | - | 0.18% |
| Kwon et al. [ | Korea | CT scan | 0.78% | 0.17% | - | - | - |
| Guenkel et al. [ | Switzerland | CT scan | 3.20% | 0.2% | - | - | |
| Hyun et al. [ | United States | CT scan | 4.60% | 0.45 | 0.06 | - | 0.03 |
| Present study | Oman | CT scan | 3.77% | 0.3% | - | - | - |
Type A: failure of fusion of two hemi arches; Type B: defect in one side of the arch; Type C: defects on both sides of arch; Type D: absence of arch except posterior tubercle; Type E: absence of whole arch including tubercle [1]. CT, computed tomography; NA, not available.