Investigation of the effects of odontoid bone anatomical location and structure on cervical lordosis angle in cervical ct examinations: A clinical study

Öz

Aim: In literature, anatomical variations of the odontoid process in the sagittal plane have been suggested to influence the magnitude of cervical lordosis. This study investigated the effects of odontoid process morphology on the degree of cervical lordosis. Material and Methods: This retrospective study included individuals who underwent cervical computed tomography (CT) scans and had no cervical vertebral disease. The age and gender of these individuals were recorded. Their CT images were analyzed for the morphologic relationships and morphologic measurements of the C2 vertebra and other cervical vertebrae in relation to their adjacent formations. Results: Thirty-five subjects (male=23, female=12) were included in the study. Correlation analysis revealed a positive correlation between C2-C7 Cobb angle and age, sagittal odontoid height, and sagittal C2 vertebral height values. In addition, positive correlations were found between sagittal C2-C7 height values and sagittal odontoid mid-thickness, sagittal odontoid base thickness, and C2 vertebral height values. Linear Regression analysis revealed that the T1 slope angle, sagittal C2 vertebral height, and sagittal C2-C7 height values could predict the C2-C7 Cobb angle. Conclusion: These findings suggest that cervical lordosis may decrease over time when the T1 slope angle, sagittal odontoid height, sagittal C2 vertebral height, and sagittal C2-C7 height are measured low, and thus, those individuals may be more exposed to cervical vertebral alignment disorders.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Odontoid process
• C2 vertebra
• cervical lordosis
• cobb angle

Servikal bt incelemelerinde odontoid kemik anatomik yerleşiminin ve yapısının servikal lordoz açısı üzerine olan etkilerinin araştırılması: Bir klinik araştırma

Öz

Amaç: Literatürde, sagittal düzlemdeki odontoid çıkıntının anatomik varyasyonlarının servikal lordozun derecesini etkilediği öne sürülmüştür. Bu çalışmada odontoid çıkıntı morfolojisinin servikal lordoz derecesi üzerindeki etkileri araştırılmıştır. Gereç ve Yöntemler: Bu retrospektif çalışmaya servikal bilgisayarlı tomografi (BT) taramaları yapılan ve servikal disk hernisi, servikal dar kanal ya da servikal vertebra hastalığı olmayan bireyler dahil edilmiştir. Katılımcıların yaşları ve cinsiyetleri kaydedilmiştir. Ayrıca bireylerin servikal BT görüntülerinde C2 vertebra ve diğer servikal vertebraların kendi aralarında ve komşu oluşumlarla olan morfolojik ilişkileri ve ölçümleri analiz edilmiştir. Bulgular: Çalışmaya 35 birey (erkek=23, kadın=12) dahil edildi. Korelasyon analizi, C2-C7 Cobb açısı ile yaş, sagittal odontoid yüksekliği ve sagittal C2 vertebra yüksekliği değerleri arasında pozitif bir korelasyon olduğunu ortaya koydu. Ek olarak, sagittal düzlemde C2-C7 yükseklik değerleri ile sagittal düzlemde odontoid çıkıntı orta kalınlığı, sagittal düzlemde odontoid çıkıntı taban kalınlığı ve sagittal düzlemde C2 vertebra yüksekliği değerleri arasında pozitif korelasyon bulundu. Doğrusal Regresyon analizi, T1 eğim açısı, sagittal düzlemde C2 vertebral yüksekliği ve sagittal düzlemde C2-C7 yüksekliği değerlerinin C2-C7 Cobb açısını tahmin edebileceğini ortaya koydu. Sonuç: Bu bulgular, T1 eğim açısı, sagittal düzlemde odontoid çıkıntı yüksekliği, sagittal düzlemde C2 vertebra yüksekliği ve sagittal düzlemde C2-C7 yüksekliği düşük ölçüldüğünde servikal lordozun zamanla azalabileceğini ve dolayısıyla bu bireylerin servikal vertebral hizalama bozukluklarına daha fazla maruz kalabileceğini düşündürdü.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Odontoid çıkıntı
• C2 vertebra
• servikal lordoz
• cobb açısı

Kaynakça

1. Kim JT, Lee HJ, Choi DY, Shin MH, Hong JT. Sequential alignment change of the cervical spine after anterior cervical discectomy and fusion in the lower cervical spine. Eur Spine J. 2016;25(7):2223-2232. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-016-4401-z
2. Le Huec JC, Saddiki R, Franke J, Rigal J, Aunoble S. Equilibrium of the human body and the gravity line: the basics. Eur Spine J. 2011;20 Suppl 5(Suppl 5):558-563. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-011-1939-7
3. Protopsaltis T, Bronsard N, Soroceanu A, Henry JK, Lafage R, Smith J, Klineberg E, Mundis G, Kim HJ, Hostin R, Hart R, Shaffrey C, Bess S, Ames C; International Spine Study Group. Cervical sagittal deformity develops after PJK in adult thoracolumbar deformity correction: radiographic analysis utilizing a novel global sagittal angular parameter, the CTPA. Eur Spine J. 2017;26(4):1111-1120. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-016-4653-7
4. Hey HWD, Lau ET, Wong GC, Tan KA, Liu GK, Wong HK. Cervical Alignment Variations in Different Postures and Predictors of Normal Cervical Kyphosis: A New Understanding. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2017;42(21):1614-1621. https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0000000000002160
5. Lee SH, Kim KT, Seo EM, Suk KS, Kwack YH, Son ES. The influence of thoracic inlet alignment on the craniocervical sagittal balance in asymptomatic adults. J Spinal Disord Tech. 2012;25(2):E41-E47. https://doi.org/10.1097/BSD.0b013e3182396301
6. Lee SH, Son ES, Seo EM, Suk KS, Kim KT. Factors determining cervical spine sagittal balance in asymptomatic adults: correlation with spinopelvic balance and thoracic inlet alignment. Spine J. 2015;15(4):705-712. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spinee.2013.06.059
7. Hardacker JW, Shuford RF, Capicotto PN, Pryor PW. Radiographic standing cervical segmental alignment in adult volunteers without neck symptoms. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1997;22(13):1472-1480. https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-199707010-00009
8. Kim SW, Kim TH, Bok DH, Jang C, Yang MH, Lee S, Yoo JH, Kwak YH, Oh JK. Analysis of cervical spine alignment in currently asymptomatic individuals: prevalence of kyphotic posture and its relationship with other spinopelvic parameters. Spine J. 2018;18(5):797-810. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spinee.2017.09.008

9. Lee JK, Hyun SJ, Kim KJ. Odontoid Incidence: A Novel Cervical Parameter Influencing Cervical Alignment from Top to Bottom. Neurospine. 2022;19(2):463-471. https://doi.org/10.14245/ns.2244220.110
10. Lee SH, Hyun SJ, Jain A. Cervical Sagittal Alignment: Literature Review and Future Directions. Neurospine. 2020;17(3):478-496. https://doi.org/10.14245/ns.2040392.196
11. Kaya M, Ceylan D, Kaçıra T, Keskin E, Çelenk Y, Yaltırık Bilgin E, Kıtıki Kaçıra Ö. Measuring the shape and dimensions of normal the bony structures in the craniovertebral junction from computed tomography images of the pediatric age group. Ulus Travma Acil Cerrahi Derg. 2022;28(7):997-1007. https://doi.org/10.14744/tjtes.2022.45610
12. Ünsal ÜÜ, Şentürk S, Güvenç Y, Yaman O. Servikal Spinal Koronal-Sagital Balans ve Parametreler [Cervical Spine Coronal-Sagittal Balance and Parameters]. Türk Nöroşir Derg. 2022;32(3):366-372.
13. Chen Y, Luo J, Pan Z, Yu L, Pang L, Zhong J, Li Z, Han Z, Cao K: The change of cervical spine alignment along with aging in the asymptomatic population: a preliminary analysis. Eur Spine J. 2017;26(9):2363-2371. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-017-5209-1
14. Makhni MC, Shillingford JN, Laratta JL, Hyun SJ, Kim YJ: Restoration of Sagittal Balance in Spinal Deformity Surgery. J Korean Neurosurg Soc. 2018;61(2):167-179. https://doi.org/10.3340/jkns.2017.0404.013
15. Rajnics P, Templier A, Skalli W, Lavaste F, Illés T: The association of sagittal spinal and pelvic parameters in asymptomatic persons and patients with isthmic spondylolisthesis. J Spinal Disord Tech. 2002;15(1):24-30. https://doi.org/10.1097/00024720-200202000-00004
16. Park MS, Moon SH, Lee HM, Kim SW, Kim TH, Lee SY, Riew KD: The effect of age on cervical sagittal alignment: normative data on 100 asymptomatic subjects. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2013;38(8):E458-E463. https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0b013e31828802c2
17. Yokoyama K, Kawanishi M, Yamada M, Tanaka H, Ito Y, Kawabata S, Kuroiwa T: Age-related variations in global spinal alignment and sagittal balance in asymptomatic Japanese adults. Neurol Res. 2017;39(5):414-418. https://doi.org/10.1080/01616412.2017.1296654
18. Legaye J, Duval-Beaupere G: Influence of a variation in the position of the arms on the sagittal connection of the gravity line with the spinal structures. Eur Spine J. 2017;26(11):2828-2833. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-017-4961-6
19. Xing R, Zhou G, Chen Q, Liang Y, Dong J: MRI to measure cervical sagittal parameters: a comparison with plain radiographs. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2017;137(4):451-455. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00402-017-2639-5
20. Jun HS, Chang IB, Song JH, Kim TH, Park MS, Kim SW, Oh JK: Is it possible to evaluate the parameters of cervical sagittal alignment on cervical computed tomographic scans? Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2014;39(10):E630-E636. https://doi.org/10.1097/BRS.0000000000000281
21. Singhatanadgige W, Kang DG, Luksanapruksa P, Peters C, Riew KD: Correlation and Reliability of Cervical Sagittal Alignment Parameters between Lateral Cervical Radiograph and Lateral Whole-Body EOS Stereoradiograph. Global Spine J. 2016;6(6):548-554. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0035-1569462
22. Oshina M, Tanaka M, Oshima Y, Tanaka S, Riew KD: Correlation and differences in cervical sagittal alignment parameters between cervical radiographs and magnetic resonance images. Eur Spine J. 2018;27(6):1408-1415. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-018-5550-z