Are spinal or paraspinal anatomic markers helpful for vertebral numbering and diagnosing lumbosacral transitional vertebrae?

Integrative Korean medicine treatment for low back pain with radiculopathy caused by Bertolotti syndrome: A CARE-compliant article and retrospective review of medical records

RATIONALE

Bertolotti syndrome (BS) is characterized by radiculopathy caused by structural anomalies. Despite the structural deformity, conservative treatment is predominantly recommended due to surgery-related complications. Because of the diagnosis complexity, the incidence and contributing factors of BS, remain controversial. We report the case of a patient with BS who was treated with integrative Korean medicine (IKM). Moreover, we evaluated the epidemiological characteristics of lumbosacral transitional vertebrae (LSTV) from medical records of patients diagnosed with LSTV at 4 different medical clinics of Korean medicine.

PATIENT CONCERNS

A 33-year-old male patient with low back pain and severe radiculopathy was diagnosed with BS (Castellvi Type II) on magnetic resonance imaging at a local orthopedic clinic. Additionally, the medical records of patients with BS who had been treated with IKM in 4 different institutions of Korean medicine were analyzed, and the characteristics of patients suffering from BS were identified.

DIAGNOSES, INTERVENTIONS, AND OUTCOMES

The patient underwent IKM treatment for 40 days as an inpatient. The patient's condition was assessed using the Euroqol 5-dimension index and Oswestry Disability Index, and symptom severity was measured using the Numeric Rating Scale. IKM was effective in improving pain and functional disability without causing any adverse effects. In a retrospective review of medical records, the study identified symptom trends reported by patients with LSTV.

LESSONS

IKM demonstrates potential efficacy in BS management, with notable trends in LSTV-related symptomatology warranting further investigation.

Frequency of Coexistent Spinal Segment Variants: Retrospective Analysis in Asymptomatic Young Adults

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Spinal segment variants are highly prevalent and can potentially lead to incorrect spinal enumeration and, consequently, interventions or surgeries at the wrong vertebral levels. Our aim was to assess the prevalence of spinal segment variants and to study the potential association among these variants in a population without histories of spine symptoms.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Consecutive computed tomography exams of 450 young adults originally evaluated for non-spinal conditions and without a history of spinal diseases from a single institution. In addition to using descriptive statistics for reporting frequencies of spinal segment variants, the association between these variants was studied by calculating odds ratios and their 95% confidence interval. Consecutive CT exams were evaluated to determine the total number of presacral segments, presence of cervical rib, thoracolumbar transitional vertebra, iliolumbar ligament, and lumbosacral transitional vertebra.

RESULTS

The spinal segment distribution variants (an atypical number of presacral segments or an atypical distribution of thoracolumbar vertebrae), cervical rib, thoracolumbar transitional vertebra, and lumbosacral transitional vertebra were reported in 23.8%, 4.2%, 15.3%, and 26.4% of cases in our study population. The presence of a cervical rib or a thoracolumbar transitional vertebra was associated with concurrent lumbosacral transitional vertebra (OR = 3.28; 95% CI, 1.29-8.47 and 1.87; 95% CI, 1.08-3.20, respectively). The inability to visualize the iliolumbar ligament was also associated with the presence of cervical ribs (OR = 3.06; 95% CI, 1.18-7.80).

CONCLUSIONS

In a population of asymptomatic young adults, spinal segment variants are both highly prevalent with a high rate of coexistence. When a spinal segment variant (eg, transitional vertebra) is diagnosed, additional imaging might be considered for accurate spine enumeration before interventions or operations.

Influence of lumbosacral transitional vertebrae on spinopelvic parameters using biplanar slot scanning full body stereoradiography-analysis of 291 healthy volunteers

BACKGROUND

Proper identification of lumbosacral transitional vertebrae (LSTV) is important to characterize the relationship between the transitional segment and adjacent levels. Classical classification schemes are inaccurate with respect to the whole spine. We propose a precise vertebral numbering method and investigated the relationship between LSTV and whole-body sagittal alignment.

METHODS

A total of 291 healthy adult volunteers with no history of spinal disease were evaluated with biplanar slot scanning full body stereoradiography to determine the prevalence of LSTV. Vertebrae were counted from the first cervical vertebra using both coronal and sagittal plane images. We then investigated the influence of LSTV on whole-body sagittal alignment in 279 participants. Whole-body key parameters descriptive statistics were compared among groups according to the number of vertebrae (L4, L5, and L6). Statistical analysis was performed between normal and LSTV cases using the Steel-Dwass analysis.

RESULTS

Of the 291 subjects, 14 (4.8%) had 23 vertebrae and 16 (5.5%) had 25 vertebrae. Eleven (3.8%) had Th11, 3 (1.0%) had L4, and 1 (0.3%) had Th11 + L6, 16 (5.5%) had L6. Compared with the normal group, the sacral base in relation to the pelvis was higher in the L4 group and lower in the L6 group. The C2-C7 angle and lumbar lordosis (LL) were increased in both the L4 and L6 groups. All remaining parameters were decreased in the L4 group and increased in the L6 group. The relationship between LL and PI was similar in the normal and LSTV groups, despite the difference in the sacral base location.

CONCLUSIONS

We propose a precise method for numbering the vertebrae using coronal and sagittal full body images. The spinopelvic parameters of the LSTV population significantly differed from those in the normal spine population due to differences in the sacral base location.

Quantitative measurements at the lumbosacral junction are more reliable parameters for identifying and numbering lumbosacral transitional vertebrae

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate quantitative parameters to identify the anatomic variation lumbosacral transitional vertebrae (LSTV) and compare them with the landmarks commonly used at present.

METHODS

A total of 2,845 PET/CT scans were reviewed, and the patients with 23 and 25 presacral vertebrae were included. The quantitative parameters, including the anterior-edge vertebral angle (AVA) of the lowest lumbar-type vertebra, the ratio of the length of the inferior endplate to that of the superior endplate (RISE) of the uppermost sacral-type vertebra and the lumbosacral intervertebral disc angle (LSIVDA), and the anatomical landmarks, including the iliac crest tangent (ICT) level, the iliolumbar ligament (ILL) origin level and psoas proximal insertion, were all evaluated to determine their ability to identify LSTV.

RESULTS

The values of AVA and RISE were significantly different between the LSTV group and the control group, and between subgroups of LSTV. The cutoff value for AVA was 73.0°, with an accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity of 91.1%, 77.5%, and 88.3%, and that for RISE was 0.79, with an accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity of 90.3%, 77.5%, and 94.2%, while that for LSIVDA was 14.15°, with an accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity of 75.9%, 65.7%, and 78.3%, to differentiate L5 sacralization from S1 lumbarization. For differentiating the controls from LSTV, the accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity of the ICT level and proximal psoas insertion were 78.0%, 70.2%, and 95.0%, versus 71.7%, 61.7%, and 94.0%.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with the anatomical landmarks, the quantitative measurements at the lumbosacral junction, including AVA and RISE, may be more helpful for differentiating subgroups of LSTV especially if only lumbar spine imaging is available.

KEY POINTS

• The quantitative parameters, the anterior-edge vertebral angle (AVA) of the lowest lumbar-type vertebra and the ratio of the length of the inferior endplate to that of the superior endplate (RISE) of the uppermost sacral-type vertebra, are more helpful for distinguishing L5 sacralization from S1 lumbarization than the previously proposed anatomic landmarks. • AVA and RISE represent relevant changes in the curvature at the lumbosacral region and the shape of the transitional vertebral body, respectively. • AVA and RISE are easily assessed, with high intra- and inter-reader reliability.

Diagnostic treatment-level discrepancies in patients with lumbosacral radicular pain and lumbar spine anomalies

BACKGROUND

Lumbosacral transitional vertebra can result in an anomalous number of lumbar vertebrae associated with wrong level treatment. The primary aim of this study was to characterize discrepancies between reported referring levels and levels from MRI reports with treated levels. The secondary aim was to analyze interobserver variability between a pain physician and a radiologist when determining levels and classifying lumbosacral transitional vertebrae.

METHODS

Between February 2016 and October 2019, a retrospective case series of prospectively collected data of the affected levels mentioned in referrals, MRI reports and treated levels was performed. The counting process, level determination, classification of lumbosacral transitional vertebrae and a secondary control were carried out by independent researchers using a standard methodology.

RESULTS

Of the 2443 referrals, 143 patients had an anomalous number of lumbar vertebrae; of these, 114 were included for analysis. The vertebral level noted in the patient's file, in the referral, and the reported level of treatment differed in 40% of these cases. The vertebral level between the MRI reports and treatment differed in 46% of cases. The interobserver reliability (radiologist vs pain physician) for classifying a transitional vertebra was fair ((κ=0.40) and was substantial (κ=0.70) when counting the vertebrae.

CONCLUSION

In the presence of lumbar spine anomalies, we report a high prevalence of discrepancies between referral levels and MRI pathological findings with treatment levels. Further research is needed to better understand clinical implications.

Changes of Fixed Anatomical Spinopelvic Parameter in Patients with Lumbosacral Transitional Vertebrae: A Matched Pair Analysis

Functional spinopelvic parameters are crucial for describing spinal alignment (SA), but this is susceptible to variation. Anatomically fixed pelvic shape is defined by the parameters pelvic radius (PR), pelvic incidence (PI), and sacral table angle (STA). In patients with lumbosacral transitional vertebrae (LSTV), the spinopelvic alignment may be altered by changes of these parameters and influences of SA. There have been no reports studying the relation between LSTV, four (4 LV) and six (6 LV) lumbar vertebrae, and fixed anatomical spinopelvic parameters. A retrospective analysis of 819 abdomen–pelvis CT scans was performed, identifying 53 patients with LSTV. In a matched-pair analysis, we analyzed the influence of LSTV and the subgroups 4 LV (n = 9) and 6 LV (n = 11) on PR, PI, and STA. LSTV were classified according to Castellvi classification. In patients with 6 LV, measurement points at the superior endplates of S1 and S2 were compared. The prevalence of LSTV was 6.5% (53/819), 6 LV was 1.3% (11/819), and 4 LV was 1.1% (9/819) in our study population. PI significantly increased (p < 0.001), STA significantly decreased (p < 0.001), and PR (p = 0.051) did not differ significantly in the LSTV group (n = 53). Similar findings were observed in the 4 LV subgroup, with an increase in PI (p < 0.021), decrease in STA (p < 0.011), and no significant difference in PR (p < 0.678). The same results were obtained in the 6 LV subgroup at measuring point S2 (true S1) PI (p = 0.010), STA (p = 0.004), and PR (p = 0.859), but not at measuring point S1 (true L6). Patients with LSTV, 4 LV, and 6 LV showed significant differences in PI and STA compared to the matched control group. PR showed no significant differences. The altered spinopelvic anatomy in LSTV patients need to be reflected in preoperative planning rebalancing the sagittal SA.

Segmented lordotic angles to assess lumbosacral transitional vertebra on EOS

PURPOSE

To test the vertical posterior vertebral angles (VPVA) of the most caudal lumbar segments measured on EOS to identify and classify the lumbosacral transitional vertebra (LSTV).

METHODS

We reviewed the EOS examinations of 906 patients to measure the VPVA at the most caudal lumbar segment (cVPVA) and at the immediately proximal segment (pVPVA), with dVPVA being the result of their difference. Mann-Whitney, Chi-square, and ROC curve statistics were used.

RESULTS

172/906 patients (19%) had LSTV (112 females, mean age: 43 ± 21 years), and 89/172 had type I LSTV (52%), 42/172 type II (24%), 33/172 type III (19%), and 8/172 type IV (5%). The cVPVA and dVPVA in non-articulated patients were significantly higher than those of patients with LSTV, patients with only accessory articulations, and patients with only bony fusion (all p < .001). The cVPVA and dVPVA in L5 sacralization were significantly higher than in S1 lumbarization (p < .001). The following optimal cutoff was found: cVPVA of 28.2° (AUC = 0.797) and dVPVA of 11.1° (AUC = 0.782) to identify LSTV; cVPVA of 28.2° (AUC = 0.665) and dVPVA of 8° (AUC = 0.718) to identify type II LSTV; cVPVA of 25.5° (AUC = 0.797) and dVPVA of - 7.5° (AUC = 0.831) to identify type III-IV LSTV; cVPVA of 20.4° (AUC = 0.693) and dVPVA of - 1.8° (AUC = 0.665) to differentiate type II from III-IV LSTV; cVPVA of 17.9° (AUC = 0.741) and dVPVA of - 4.5° (AUC = 0.774) to differentiate L5 sacralization from S1 lumbarization.

CONCLUSION

The cVPVA and dVPVA measured on EOS showed good diagnostic performance to identify LSTV, to correctly classify it, and to differentiate L5 sacralization from S1 lumbarization.

Lumbar plain radiograph is not reliable to identify lumbosacral transitional vertebra types according to Castellvi classification principle

Background

The anteroposterior view of the lumbar plain radiograph (AP-LPR) was chosen as the original and first radiographic tool to determine and classify lumbosacral transitional vertebra with morphological abnormality (MA-LSTV) according to the Castellvi classification. However, recent studies found that AP-LPR might not be sufficient to detect or classify MA-LSTV correctly. The present study aims to verify the reliability of AP-LPR on detecting and classifying MA-LSTV types, taking coronal reconstructed CT images (CT-CRIs) as the gold criteria.

Methods

Patients with suspected MA-LSTVs determined by AP-LPR were initially enrolled. Among them, those who received CT-CRIs were formally enrolled to verify the sensitivity of AP-LPR on detecting and classifying MA-LSTV types according to the Castellvi classification principle.

Results

A total of 298 cases were initially enrolled as suspected MA-LSTV, among which 91 cases who received CT-CRIs were enrolled into the final study group. All suspected MA-LSTVs were verified to be real MA-LSTVs by CT-CRIs. However, 35.2% of the suspected MA-LSTV types judged by AP-LPR were not consistent with the final types judged by CT-CRIs. Two suspected type IIIa and 20 suspected type IIIb MA-LSTVs were verified to be true, while 9 of 39 suspected type IIa, 9 and 3 of 17 suspected type IIb, and 11 of 13 suspected type IV MA-LSTVs were verified to truly be type IIIa, IIIb, IV and IIIb MA-LSTVs by CT-CRIs, respectively. Incomplete joint-like structure (JLS) or bony union structure (BUS) and remnants of sclerotic band (RSB) between the transverse process (TP) and sacrum were considered to be the main reasons for misclassification.

Conclusion

Although AP-LPR could correctly detect MA-LSTV, it could not give accurate type classification. CT-CRIs could provide detailed information between the TP and sacrum area and could be taken as the gold standard to detect and classify MA-LSTV.

Role of iliac crest tangent in correct numbering of lumbosacral transitional vertebrae

Background/aim

The iliac crest tangent (ICT) has recently emerged as a reliable landmark to correctly number the lumbosacral transitional vertebrae (LSTV). We retrospectively evaluated the reproducibility and accuracy of the ICT as a landmark in subjects without disc degeneration.

Materials and methods

Fifty-eight patients with LSTV [19 female, 41 (26–52) years] and 55 controls without LSTV [23 female, 40 (26–55) years] who had undergone spinal computed tomography were included. The ICT was drawn on the coronal images, with the cursor in the sagittal view set to the posterior ⅓ of the vertebral body located one level above the LSTV. When more than 1.25 vertebral body was counted below the ICT, the LSTV was considered as S1, otherwise it was considered as L5. The gold standard was counting the vertebrae craniocaudally.

Results

The interobserver agreement was good for determining ICT level (Cohen’s kappa = 0.78, P < 0.001). The rate of correct numbering by ICT in the LSTV group was significantly less than in the controls (43.1% vs. 96.4%, respectively, P < 0.001). Patients with sacralization had a significantly lower correct numbering rate than patients with lumbarization (33.3% vs. 63.2%, respectively, P = 0.03).

Conclusion

ICT does not seem to be a reliable landmark for correct numbering of LSTV in patients with no intervertebral disc degeneration.

Psoas proximal insertion as a simple and reliable landmark for numbering lumbar vertebrae on MRI of the lumbar spine

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the value of psoas muscle proximal insertion for correct numbering of the lumbar vertebrae in MRI, in particular in case of lumbosacral transitional vertebra (LSTV).

METHODS

Two radiologists assessed 477 MRI scans of the lumbar spine with a sagittal localizer sequence on the whole spine for numbering vertebrae caudally from C2. Proximal insertion of the psoas was determined as the most proximal vertebra with psoas over half of its body on coronal T2 STIR sequence. The last lumbar vertebra was named considering both its number and the presence or absence of LSTV according to Castellvi classification. These same parameters were also assessed on 207 PET-CT scans of another cohort including the whole spine.

RESULTS

Proximal insertion of the psoas was L1 in 94.1% of cases: 98.5% in case of modal anatomy, 81.4% in case of LSTV, and 51.7% in case of missing or supernumerary lumbar vertebra without LSTV. There was no statistically significant difference between MRI and CT data. The inter-reader agreement for determination of psoas proximal insertion was excellent (kappa = 0.96).

CONCLUSION

Proximal insertion of the psoas muscle is a helpful marker for correct numbering of the lumbar vertebrae in MRI and to detect a complete lumbosacral segmentation anomaly.

KEY POINTS

• Proximal insertion of the psoas muscle can be easily identified on a coronal T2 STIR sequence. • Psoas proximal insertion on the spine almost always designates the first lumbar vertebra and is helpful to accurately number all lumbar vertebrae, especially in case of lumbosacral transitional vertebra. • Conversely, when psoas muscle does not insert five lumbar bodies above the apparent lumbosacral joint, the probability of variation in the number of lumbar vertebrae is high.

A review of lumbosacral transitional vertebrae and associated vertebral numeration

PURPOSE

To review the current literature on methods of accurate numeration of vertebral segments in patients with Lumbosacral transitional vertebrae (LSTVs). LSTVs are a common congenital anomaly of the L5-S1 junction. While their clinical significance has been debated, unquestionable is the need for their identification prior to spinal surgery. We hypothesize that there are no reliable landmarks by which we can accurately number transitional vertebrae, and thus a full spinal radiograph is required.

METHODS

A Pubmed and EMBASE search using various combinations of specific key words including "LSTV", "lumbosacral transitional vertebrae", "count", "vertebral numbering", and "number" was performed.

RESULTS

The gold standard for spinal segment numeration in patients with LSTV remains whole spine imaging and counting caudally, starting from C2. If whole spine imaging is not available, the use of the iliac crest tangent sign on coronal magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) has fairly reliable sensitivity and specificity (81 and 64-88%, respectively) for accurate numeration of LSTV. The role of paraspinal anatomic markers such as the right renal artery, superior mesenteric artery, aortic bifurcation, and conus medullaris, for identification of vertebral levels is unreliable and should not be used.

CONCLUSIONS

A sagittal whole spine view should be added as a scout view when patients obtain lumbar MRI to standardize the vertebral numbering technique. To date, there has been no other method for accurate numeration of a transitional vertebral segment, other than counting caudally from C2. These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material.

Localizing the L5 Vertebra Using Nerve Morphology on MRI: An Accurate and Reliable Technique

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Multiple methods have been used to determine the lumbar vertebral level on MR imaging, particularly when full spine imaging is unavailable. Because postmortem studies show 95% accuracy of numbering the lumbar vertebral bodies by counting the lumbar nerve roots, attention to lumbar nerve morphology on axial MR imaging can provide numbering clues. We sought to determine whether the L5 vertebra could be accurately localized by using nerve morphology on MR imaging.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

One hundred eight cases with full spine MR imaging were numbered from the C2 vertebral body to the sacrum with note of thoracolumbar and lumbosacral transitional states. The origin level of the L5 nerve and iliolumbar ligament were documented in all cases. The reference standard of numbering by full spine imaging was compared with the nerve morphology numbering method. Five blinded raters evaluated all lumbar MRIs with nerve morphology technique twice. Prevalence and bias-adjusted κ were used to measure interrater and intrarater reliability.

RESULTS

The L5 nerve arose from the 24th presacral vertebra (L5) in 106/108 cases. The percentage of perfect agreement with the reference standard was 98.1% (95% CI, 93.5%-99.8%), which was preserved in transitional and numeric variation states. The iliolumbar ligament localization method showed 83.3% (95% CI, 74.9%-89.8%) perfect agreement with the reference standard. Inter- and intrarater reliability when using the nerve morphology method was strong.

CONCLUSIONS

The exiting L5 nerve can allow accurate localization of the corresponding vertebrae, which is essential for preprocedure planning in cases where full spine imaging is not available. This neuroanatomic method displays higher agreement with the reference standard compared with previously described methods, with strong inter- and intrarater reliability.

Role of Anatomical Landmarks in Identifying Normal and Transitional Vertebra in Lumbar Spine Magnetic Resonance Imaging

Study Design

Retrospective study.

Purpose

Identification of transitional vertebra is important in spine imaging, especially in presurgical planning. Pasted images of the whole spine obtained using high-field magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) are helpful in counting vertebrae and identifying transitional vertebrae. Counting vertebrae and identifying transitional vertebrae is challenging in isolated studies of lumbar spine and in studies conducted in low-field MRI. An incorrect evaluation may lead to wrong-level treatment. Here, we identify the location of different anatomical structures that can help in counting and identifying vertebrae.

Overview of Literature

Many studies have assessed the vertebral segments using various anatomical structures such as costal facets (CF), aortic bifurcation (AB), inferior vena cava confluence (IC), right renal artery (RRA), celiac trunk (CT), superior mesenteric artery root (SR), iliolumbar ligament (ILL) psoas muscle (PM) origin, and conus medullaris. However, none have yielded any consistent results.

Methods

We studied the locations of the anatomical structures CF, AB, IC, RRA, CT, SR, ILL, and PM in patients who underwent whole spine MRI at our department.

Results

In our study, 81.4% patients had normal spinal segmentation, 14.7% had sacralization, and 3.8% had lumbarization. Vascular landmarks had variable origin. There were caudal and cranial shifts with respect to lumbarization and sacralization. In 93.8% of cases in the normal group, ILL emerged from either L5 alone or the adjacent disc. In the sacralization group, ILL was commonly seen in L5. In the lumbarization group, ILL emerged from L5 and the adjacent disc (66.6%). CFs were identified at D12 in 96.9% and 91.7% of patients in the normal and lumbarization groups, respectively. The PM origin was observed from D12 or D12–L1 in most patients in the normal and sacralization groups.

Conclusions

CF, PM, and ILL were good identification markers for D12 and L5, but none were 100% accurate.

A Review of Symptomatic Lumbosacral Transitional Vertebrae: Bertolotti's Syndrome

BACKGROUND

Lumbosacral transitional vertebrae (LSTV) are increasingly recognized as a common anatomical variant associated with altered patterns of degenerative spine changes. This review will focus on the clinical significance of LSTV, disruptions in normal spine biomechanics, imaging techniques, diagnosis, and treatment.

METHODS

A Pubmed search using the specific key words "LSTV," "lumbosacral transitional vertebrae," and "Bertolotti's Syndrome" was performed. The resulting group of manuscripts from our search was evaluated.

RESULTS

LSTV are associated with alterations in biomechanics and anatomy of spinal and paraspinal structures, which have important implications on surgical approaches and techniques. LSTV are often inaccurately detected and classified on standard AP radiographs and MRI. The use of whole-spine images as well as geometric relationships between the sacrum and lumbar vertebra increase accuracy. Uncertainty regarding the cause, clinical significance, and treatment of LSTV persists. Some authors suggest an association between LSTV types II and IV and low back pain. Pseudoarticulation between the transverse process and the sacrum creates a "false joint" susceptible to arthritic changes and osteophyte formation potentially leading to nerve root entrapment. The diagnosis of symptomatic LSTV is considered with appropriate patient history, imaging studies, and diagnostic injections. A positive radionuclide study along with a positive effect from a local injection helps distinguish the transitional vertebra as a significant pain source. Surgical resection is reserved for a subgroup of LSTV patients who fail conservative treatment and whose pain is definitively attributed to the anomalous pseudoarticulation.

CONCLUSIONS

Due to the common finding of low back pain and the wide prevalence of LSTV in the general population, it is essential to differentiate between symptoms originating from an anomalous psuedoarticulation from other potential sources of low back pain. Further studies with larger sample sizes and longer follow-up time would better demonstrate the effectiveness of surgical resection and help guide treatment.