Osteological morphometric analysis of instrumentation safe zones of C1 and C2 vertebra in North Indian population: a multicentric study
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.18203/issn.2455-4510.IntJResOrthop20233154Keywords:
Atlas, Axis, Morphometric analysis, Safe zones, Pedicle screw, Cervical spine surgery, Odontoid fracture, Vertebral artery damageAbstract
Background: The complex anatomy and critical functional role of the C1 and C2 vertebrae necessitate precise understanding of safe zones for instrumentation to mitigate risks during surgical interventions. This study aimed to conduct a comprehensive morphometric analysis to identify and characterize safe zones for instrumentation within C1 and C2 vertebrae. Though there are multiple radiological based studies, actual osteological measurements are not available for North Indian population.
Methods: 200 atlas and axis vertebrae were measured within an accuracy of 0.01 mm to ascertain various dimensions, distances and angles to guide safe exposure and instrumentation. To the best of our knowledge this observational morphometric study is first to provide actual osteological measurements in large number of C1 and C2 vertebrae in North Indian population.
Results: The morphometric analysis revealed precise measurements of pedicle dimensions, transverse foramen parameters, and distances from key anatomical landmarks within C1 and C2 vertebrae. Safe zones for instrumentation were identified based on these measurements, considering the optimal implant size and trajectory to minimize the risk of neural or vascular damage. Differences between the morphology of North Indian, South Indian and Turkish C1 and C2 morphology was also identified.
Conclusions: This study provides critical insights into the morphometric parameters which can be used to identify safe zones for instrumentation within the C1 and C2 vertebrae. The identified safe zones and associated measurements are essential for optimizing surgical strategies, enhancing instrumentation accuracy, and ultimately improving patient outcomes during craniovertebral surgical procedures. Spine Surgeons can utilize this data to tailor surgical approaches and implant placements, promoting safer and more effective interventions in the challenging anatomical region of the craniovertebral junction.
References
Abou MA, Solanki G and Casey AT. Variation of the groove in the axis vertebra for vertebral artery: implication for instrumentation. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1997;79(5):820-3.
An HS, Simpson JM. Spinal instrumentation of the cervical spine. In: Surgery of the Cervical Spine. London, Martin Dunitz. 1994;379-400.
Doherty BJ, Heggeness MH. The quantitative anatomy of the atlas. Spine. 1999;19(22):2497-500.
Brookes AL, Jenkins EB. Atlanto-axial arthrodesis by wedge compression method. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1978;60(3):279-84.
Taitz C, Nathan H, Arensburg B. Anatomical observations of the foramina transversaria. J Neurol, Neurosurg Psychiatr. 1978;41(2):170-6.
Taitz C, Arensburg B. Vertebral artery tortuosity with concomitant erosion of the foramen of the transverse process of the axis. Possible clinical implications. Acta Anatomica. 1991;141(2):104-8.
Cacciola F, Phalke U, Goel A. Vertebral artery in relationship with C1-C2 vertebra: An anatomical study. Neurol India. 2004;52(2):178-84.
Cattrysse E, Provyn S, Gagey O, Kool P, Clarys JP, Roy PV. In vitro three dimensional morphometry of the lateral atlantoaxial articular surfaces.Spine. 2008;33(14):1503-8.
Cavalcanti DD, Agrawal A, Garcia-Gonzalez U, Crawford NR, Tavares PL, Theodore N et al. Anterolateral C1-C2 transarticular fixation for atlantoaxial arthrodesis: landmarks, working area, and angles of approach. Neurosurgery. 2010;67:38-42.
Cheung JP, Luk KD. Complications of anterior and posterior cervical spine surgery. Asian Spine J. 2016;10(2):385-400.
Cooper PR, Cohen A, Rosiello A. Posterior stabilization of cervical spine fractures and subluxations using plates and screws. Neurosurgery. 1988;23:300-6.
Dickman CA, Hurlbert RJ. Cannulated screws for odontoid And atlantoaxial transarticular screw fixation. In: Rengachary SS, Wilkins RH (eds). Neurosurgical Operative Atlas. Illinois: AANS, 1998;7:29-41.
Dugailly PM, Sobczak S, Sholukha V, Jan SV, Salvia P, Feipel V. In vitro 3D–kinematics of the upper cervical spine: helical axis and simulation for axial rotation and flexion extension. Surg Radiol Anat. 2010;32(2):141-51.
Ebraheim NA, Xu R, Lin D, Ahmad M, Heck BE. The quantitative anatomy of the vertebral artery groove of the atlas and its relation to the posterior atlantoaxial approach. Spine. 1998;23(3):320-3.
Ebraheim NA, Xu R, Lin D, Steve H, Yeasting RA. Quantitative anatomy of the transverse foramen and pedicle of the axis. J Spinal Disord. 1998;11(6):521-5.
Afsharpour S, Hoiriis KT, Fox RB, Demons S. An anatomical study of arcuate foramen and its clinical implications: a case report. Chiropr Man Therap. 2016;24:4.
Yew A, Lu D, Lu DC. CT-based morphometric analysis of C1 laminar dimensions: C1 translaminar screw fixation is a feasible technique for salvage of atlantoaxial fusions. Surg Neurol Int. 2015;6(4):S236-9.
Tsuji T, Chiba K, Horiuchi Y, Urabe T, Fujita S, Matsumoto M. Atlantoaxial Stabilization Using C1 and C2 Laminar Screw Fixation. Asian Spine J. 2017;11:314-8.
Cacciola F, Phalke U, Goel A. Vertebral artery in relationship to C1-C2 vertebrae: an anatomical study. Neurology. 2004;2:178-84.
Madawi AA, Case ATH, Solanki GA, Tuite G, Veres R, Crockard HA. Radiological and anatomical evaluation of the atlantoaxial transarticular screw fixation technique. J Neurosurg. 1997;86:961-8.
Shilpa Gosavi, Vatsala Swamy. Morphometric study of the Axis vertebra. Eur J Anat. 2012;16(2):98-103.
Lang J. Skull Base and Related Structures. 1st ed. Stuttgart: Schattauer. 1995;292.
Gupta S, Goel A. Quantitative anatomy of the lateral masses of the atlas and axis vertebrae. Neurol India. 2000;48(2):120-5.
Sengul G, Kodiglu HH. Morphometric anatomy of atlas and axis vertebra. Turkish Neurosurg. 2006;16(2):69-76.
Karaikovic EE, Daubs MD, Madsen RW. Morphologic characteristics of human cervical pedicles. Spine. 1997;22(5):493-500.
