| Literature DB >> 34934564 |
Bulent Guneri1, Gulay Gungor2.
Abstract
Introduction The coccyx is well-known to be a highly variable structure considering its morphology. To our knowledge, the relationship between the coccygeal types and other morphological features has not been studied yet. In addition to the interrelations among morphological parameters, this study investigated the morphology and morphometry of coccyx more extensively in the adult Turkish population using computerized tomography images. Methods Five hundred subjects who underwent pelvic computerized tomography were included in this study. In addition to coccyx type and the counts of coccygeal vertebrae and segments, the presence of coccygeal deviation, sacrococcygeal joint (SCJ) fusion, SCJ subluxation, intercoccygeal joint (ICJ) fusion, and coccygeal spicule were evaluated. The coccygeal length, sacrococcygeal angle, and intercoccygeal angle were measured on the digital workstation. The findings were subjected to statistical analyses. Results The coccygeal vertebra count ranged between three to five, with an average of 4.04 ± 0.48. The range of coccygeal segment count was between one and five, with an average of 2.53 ± 1.02. ICJ fusion in any segment, SCJ fusion, and SCJ subluxation were identified in 397 subjects (79.4%), 343 subjects (68.6%), and 17 subjects (3.4%), respectively. The coccyx types from the most common to the least common were as follows: type 2, type 1, type 3, type 4, and type 5. Coccygeal deviation to the left side was observed in 71 subjects (14.2%), while coccygeal deviation to the right side was observed in 61 subjects (12.2%). A coccygeal spicule was identified in 73 subjects (14.6%). The subjects' mean age demonstrated no significant difference considering the ICJ fusion (p=0.271), SCJ subluxation (p=0.51), coccygeal spicule (p=0.337), features of coccygeal deviation (p=0.83), and coccyx types (p=0.11). The subjects with SCJ fusion (50.7 ± 18.3 years) were significantly older than the subjects without SCJ fusion (46.5 ± 18.5 years) (p=0.016). The differences between the coccyx types considering the rate of SCJ fusion (p=0.002), ICJ fusion (p=0.04), and spicule presence (p<0.001) as well as the coccygeal vertebra count (p<0.001) were significant. Conclusion The presence of coccygeal spicule, a risk factor for coccydynia, is reported to be 14.6% in this study group that represents the Turkish population. This study indicates an association between the coccyx types and the frequency of SCJ fusion, ICJ fusion, and spicule presence and consequently suggests the significance of the coccyx type among the morphological features to cause susceptibility to coccydynia. Due to the multiplicity of the pain generators in the coccygeal region that is established by previous reports, the comparisons of different human populations and the knowledge on the interrelations between the morphologic parameters might facilitate the comprehension of the etiology of coccydynia. The clarification of interrelationship existence among the coccygeal morphological parameters requires further investigations.Entities:
Keywords: anatomic variation; bone; bone morphology; bone spur; caudal vertebra; coccyx; joints; spicule
Year: 2021 PMID: 34934564 PMCID: PMC8683969 DOI: 10.7759/cureus.19687
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Cureus ISSN: 2168-8184
The definitions of the specific morphologic and morphometric parameters
| Morphologic parameters | Definition |
| Coccyx type (based on the modified Postacchini and Massobrio classification) [ | Type 1: the coccyx is slightly curved and its tip points downwards; type 2: the coccyx is significantly curved and its tip points forwards; type 3: the coccyx is sharply angulated at the intercoccygeal joint; type 4: the coccyx has subluxation at the sacrococcygeal joint or first intercoccygeal joint; type 5: retroverted coccyx. |
| Number of coccygeal segment(s) [ | The calculation is based on the principle considering the independent (unfused) coccygeal vertebrae and accepts the fused vertebrae as one segment. |
| Sacrococcygeal/intercoccygeal joint fusion [ | Continuity between the bones at the sacrococcygeal/intercoccygeal joint. |
| Coccygeal spicule | Bony projection originating from the most caudal aspect of the coccyx. |
| Morphometric parameters | Definition |
| Coccygeal length | The distance between the midpoint of the upper endplate of first coccygeal vertebra and the tip of the coccyx, as depicted in Figure |
| Intercoccygeal angle | The angle is formed between the lines passing through the middle of first coccygeal vertebra and the middle of the rest of coccygeal vertebrae in the mid-sagittal plane, as depicted in Figure |
| Sacrococcygeal angle | The angle is formed by the intersection of a line between the midpoint of the upper endplate of first sacral vertebra and the midpoint of the upper endplate of first coccygeal vertebra and a line between the midpoint of the upper endplate of first coccygeal vertebra and the tip of the coccyx, as depicted in Figure |
Figure 1The schematic representation of the measurements related to the coccygeal morphometry
a. Coccygeal length, b. Intercoccygeal angle, c. Sacrococcygeal angle.
The overall and gender-specific distribution of the numbers of the coccygeal vertebrae
| The numbers of coccygeal vertebrae | n (percentage) in females | n (percentage) in males | n (percentage) in total |
| Three | 36 (7.2%) | 13 (2.6%) | 49 (9.8%) |
| Four | 193 (38.6%) | 191 (38.2%) | 384 (76.8%) |
| Five | 30 (6.0%) | 37 (7.4%) | 67 (13.4%) |
| Overall (3-5) | 259 (51.8%) | 241 (48.2%) | 500 (100%) |
Figure 2Examples of computerized tomography images in the sagittal plane showing five types of coccyx
a. Type 1 coccyx in a 61-year-old female participant. b. Type 2 coccyx in a 54-year-old male participant. c. Type 3 coccyx in a 69-year-old female participant. d. Type 4 coccyx in a 53-year-old female participant. e. Type 5 coccyx in a 24-year-old male participant.
The gender-specific distribution of the coccyx types
| Coccyx types | Female – n (%) | Male – n (%) | Total – n (%) |
| Type 1 | 38 (7.6%) | 25 (5.0%) | 63 (12.6%) |
| Type 2 | 174 (34.8) | 174 (34.8%) | 348 (69.6%) |
| Type 3 | 28 (5.6%) | 27 (5.4%) | 55 (11.0%) |
| Type 4 | 17 (3.4%) | 13 (2.6%) | 30 (6.0%) |
| Type 5 | 2 (0.4%) | 2 (0.4%) | 4 (0.8%) |
| Overall | 259 (51.8%) | 241 (48.2%) | 500 (100%) |
Figure 3Example of computerized tomography image in the sagittal plane showing a coccygeal spicule (white arrow).
The relationship of coccyx types with the presence of SCJ fusion, ICJ fusion, and coccygeal spicule and the mean number of the coccygeal vertebrae
* Chi-square; ** ANOVA.
ICJ: intercoccygeal joint, SCJ: sacrococcygeal joint, SD: standard deviation.
| Type 1 | Type 2 | Type 3 | Type 4 | Type 5 | |
| SCJ fusion (-): n (%) | 8 (1.6%) | 113 (22.6%) | 21 (4.2%) | 12 (2.4%) | 3 (0.6%) |
| SCJ fusion (+): n (%) | 55 (11.0%) | 235 (47.0%) | 34 (6.8%) | 18 (3.6%) | 1 (0.2%) |
| p=0.002* | |||||
| ICJ fusion (-): n (%) | 7 (1.4%) | 71 (14.2%) | 14 (2.8%) | 11 (2.2%) | 0 |
| ICJ fusion (+): n (%) | 56 (11.2%) | 277 (55.4%) | 41 (8.2%) | 19 (3.8%) | 4 (0.8%) |
| p=0.04* | |||||
| Coccygeal spicule (-): n (%) | 43 (8.6%) | 310 (62.0%) | 47 (9.4%) | 27 (5.4%) | 0 |
| Coccygeal spicule (+): n (%) | 20 (4.0%) | 38 (7.6%) | 8 (1.6%) | 3 (0.6%) | 4 (0.8%) |
| p<0.001* | |||||
| The numbers of coccygeal vertebrae: mean±SD | 3.82±0.49b,c | 4.04±0.44a,c | 4.25±0.55a,b,e | 4.03±0.49 | 3.50±0.57c |
| p<0.001** | |||||