| Literature DB >> 34746676 |
Toru Iga1.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To investigate the characteristics of iliosacral (IS) screw corridors of Japanese pelves.Entities:
Keywords: iliosacral screw; pelvic fracture; sacral dysmorphism
Year: 2021 PMID: 34746676 PMCID: PMC8568404 DOI: 10.1097/OI9.0000000000000145
Source DB: PubMed Journal: OTA Int ISSN: 2574-2167
Figure 1(A–C) Measurement of the horizontal corridor in the upper sacral segment on reconstructed CT images. As the standard axis was aligned with the anterior cortex in the mid-sagittal section (A), the true coronal images (B), and the true axial images (C), which were parallel and perpendicular, respectively, to the standard axis, were displayed automatically. On true coronal and true axial images, a corridor with the maximum width was sought while avoiding screw penetration outside the intraosseous corridor. The width on each plane was recorded (B and C, double-headed arrows). The same measurement was performed for the second and third horizontal corridors.
Figure 2(A–D) Measurement of a cranially tilted corridor in subjects without an adequate horizontal corridor in the upper segment. (A) In this subject, a line tangent to the superior border of the upper sacral foramina (dashed line) passes antero-cranially to the iliac cortical density (ICD, arrowheads), indicating that the corridor was not measurable. (B) In such subjects, the trajectory of the corridor was tilted cranially on the true coronal plane, that is, antero-cranially to the longitudinal body axis, in a stepwise fashion until its width reached 10 mm. The angle between this tilted corridor and the horizontal axis was defined as the minimal tilting angle (MTA, double-headed arrow). (C) The width of the corridor was also measured on the tilted axial plane. (D) Three-dimensional image of the same subject.
Width and adequacy of the upper, second, and the third sacral horizontal corridors
| Average diameter (range, SD) (mm) | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| ||||
| Nonmeasurable | True coronal plane | True axial plane | Adequate corridor | |
| S1 | 4 (9.5%) | 9.2 (2–19.8, 4.8)∗ | 13.8 (7.4–21.8, 3.5)∗ | 17 (40.5%) |
| S2 | 0 | 11.2 (6.3–16.2, 2.2) | 11.0 (6.3–14.7, 1.9) | 29 (69.0%) |
| S3 | 0 | 4.7 (1.3–8.7, 1.7) | 6.3 (2.8–10.4, 2.0) | 0 |
A corridor was defined as “adequate” if its diameter on both planes was 10 mm or more.
S1 = upper sacral segment; S2 = second sacral segment; S3 = third sacral segment.
Four sacra with a nonmeasurable S1 corridor were excluded.
Comparison of demographic data in terms of upper and second sacral corridor adequacy
| Gender | Height | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
| |||
| Male | Female | Average | SD | |
| S1 | ||||
| Adequate | 9 | 12 | 164.8 | −9.1 |
| Inadequate | 8 | 13 | 159.6 | −9.3 |
| | 1 | .823 | ||
| S2 | ||||
| Adequate | 18 | 3 | 163.9 | −8.6 |
| Inadequate | 11 | 10 | 156.8 | −9.7 |
| | .043 | .033 | ||
A corridor was defined as “adequate” if its diameter on both planes was 10 mm or more.
S1 = upper sacral segment; S2 = second sacral segment; SD = standard deviation.
Relationship of upper and second sacral segment adequacy
| S2 | ||
|---|---|---|
|
| ||
| Adequate | Inadequate | |
| S1 | ||
| Adequate | 8 | 9 |
| Inadequate | 21 | 4 |
A corridor was defined as “adequate” if its diameter on both planes was 10 mm or more. Sacra without an adequate S1 corridor were more frequently accompanied by an adequate S2 corridor.
S1 = upper sacral segment; S2 = second sacral segment.
(P = .018, Fisher exact test).
Binary logistic regression analysis of patient-related variables with respect to upper and the second sacral segment adequacy
| Gender | Height | |
|---|---|---|
| S1 | ||
| Odds ratio (95% CI) | 3.6 (0.5–28.1) | 1.0 (0.9–1.1) |
| | .215 | .879 |
| S2 | ||
| Odds ratio (95% CI) | 5.7 (0.6–54.3) | 1.0 (0.8–1.1) |
| | .129 | .413 |
CI = confidence interval; S1 = upper sacral segment; S2 = second sacral segment.