Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Neuroradiology 8/2012

01-08-2012 | Diagnostic Neuroradiology

CT volumetry of lumbar vertebral bodies in patients with hypoplasia L5 and bilateral spondylolysis and in normal controls

Authors: Guido E. Wilms, Endry Willems, Philippe Demaerel, Frederik De Keyzer

Published in: Neuroradiology | Issue 8/2012

Login to get access

Abstract

Introduction

To examine the feasibility and results of calculating the volume of lumbar vertebral bodies in normal patients and patients with suspected hypoplasia of L5.

Methods

Lumbar multi-detector CT was performed in 38 patients with bilateral spondylolysis and hypoplasia of L5 and in 38 normal patients. Lumbar vertebral body volume of L3, L4 and L5 was measured by CT volumetry with a semi-automated program, created with MeVisLab.

Results

In the control group, the average vertebral body volume (in cubic centimeters) of L3 was 35.93 (±7.33), 36.34 (±7.13) for L4 and 34.63 (±6.88) for L5. In patients with suspected hypoplasia L5 the average body volume (in cubic centimeters) of L3 was 36.85 (±7.37), 36.90 (±6.99) for L4 and 33.14 (±6.57) for L5. The difference in mean vertebral body volume for L3, L4 and L5 between both groups was statistically not significant. However, there was a statistically significant difference of the ratio L5/L4 (P < 0.001) between both groups: the mean ratio L5/L4 in the control group was 95.3 ± 3.9%, the ratio for the hypoplastic L5 group was 89.9 ± 6.3%.

Conclusions

There was no significant difference in the vertebral body volume for L3, L4 and L5 between both groups due to inter-patient variability. However, the relation between the body volume of L5 and L4 is significantly different between both groups. The volume of the vertebral body of L5 proved to be on average 10.2% smaller than the volume of L4 in the group with hypoplasia L5 versus 4.7% in the control group.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Frank DF, Miller JE (1979) Hypoplasia of the lumbar vertebral body simulating spondylolisthesis. Radiology 133:59–60PubMed Frank DF, Miller JE (1979) Hypoplasia of the lumbar vertebral body simulating spondylolisthesis. Radiology 133:59–60PubMed
2.
go back to reference Wilms G, Maldague B, Parizel P, Meylaerts L, Vanneste D, Peluso J (2009) Hypoplasia of L5 and wedging and pseudospondylolisthesis in patients with spondylolysis: study with MR imaging. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 30:674–680PubMedCrossRef Wilms G, Maldague B, Parizel P, Meylaerts L, Vanneste D, Peluso J (2009) Hypoplasia of L5 and wedging and pseudospondylolisthesis in patients with spondylolysis: study with MR imaging. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 30:674–680PubMedCrossRef
3.
go back to reference Wang TM, Shih C (1992) Morphometric variations of the lumbar vertebrae between Chinese and Indian adults. Acta Anat (Basel) 144:23–29CrossRef Wang TM, Shih C (1992) Morphometric variations of the lumbar vertebrae between Chinese and Indian adults. Acta Anat (Basel) 144:23–29CrossRef
4.
go back to reference Davies KM, Recker RR, Heaney RP (1989) Normal vertebral dimensions and normal variation in serial measurements of vertebrae. J Bone Miner Res 4:341–349PubMedCrossRef Davies KM, Recker RR, Heaney RP (1989) Normal vertebral dimensions and normal variation in serial measurements of vertebrae. J Bone Miner Res 4:341–349PubMedCrossRef
5.
go back to reference Kim SK, Lee SR, Moon WJ, Park DW, Hahm CK (2000) Regional disc change in segmental hypoplasia of the lumbosacral vertebral bodies: MR findings. J Korean Radiol Soc 43:25–30 Kim SK, Lee SR, Moon WJ, Park DW, Hahm CK (2000) Regional disc change in segmental hypoplasia of the lumbosacral vertebral bodies: MR findings. J Korean Radiol Soc 43:25–30
6.
go back to reference Ulmer JL, Mathews VP, Elster AD, Mark LP, Daniels DL, Mueller W (1997) MR imaging of lumbar spondylolysis: the importance of ancillary observations. AJR Am J Roentgenol 169:233–239PubMed Ulmer JL, Mathews VP, Elster AD, Mark LP, Daniels DL, Mueller W (1997) MR imaging of lumbar spondylolysis: the importance of ancillary observations. AJR Am J Roentgenol 169:233–239PubMed
7.
go back to reference Johnson DW, Farnum GN, Latchaw RE, Erba SM (1989) MR imaging of the pars interarticularis. AJR Am J Roentgenol 152:327–332PubMed Johnson DW, Farnum GN, Latchaw RE, Erba SM (1989) MR imaging of the pars interarticularis. AJR Am J Roentgenol 152:327–332PubMed
8.
go back to reference Ulmer JL, Elster AD, Mathews VP, King JC (1994) Distinction between degenerative and isthmic spondylolisthesis on sagittal MR images: importance of increased anteroposterior diameter of the spinal canal (“wide canal sign”). AJR Am J Roentgenol 163:411–416PubMed Ulmer JL, Elster AD, Mathews VP, King JC (1994) Distinction between degenerative and isthmic spondylolisthesis on sagittal MR images: importance of increased anteroposterior diameter of the spinal canal (“wide canal sign”). AJR Am J Roentgenol 163:411–416PubMed
9.
go back to reference Ulmer JL, Mathews VP, Elster AD, King JC (1995) Lumbar spondylolysis without spondylolisthesis: recognition of isolated posterior element subluxation on sagittal MR. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 16:1393–1398PubMed Ulmer JL, Mathews VP, Elster AD, King JC (1995) Lumbar spondylolysis without spondylolisthesis: recognition of isolated posterior element subluxation on sagittal MR. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 16:1393–1398PubMed
10.
go back to reference Sherif H, Mahfouz AE (2004) Epidural fat interposition between dura mater and spinous process: a new sign for the diagnosis of spondylolysis on MR imaging of the lumbar spine. Eur Radiol 14:970–973PubMedCrossRef Sherif H, Mahfouz AE (2004) Epidural fat interposition between dura mater and spinous process: a new sign for the diagnosis of spondylolysis on MR imaging of the lumbar spine. Eur Radiol 14:970–973PubMedCrossRef
Metadata
Title
CT volumetry of lumbar vertebral bodies in patients with hypoplasia L5 and bilateral spondylolysis and in normal controls
Authors
Guido E. Wilms
Endry Willems
Philippe Demaerel
Frederik De Keyzer
Publication date
01-08-2012
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
Neuroradiology / Issue 8/2012
Print ISSN: 0028-3940
Electronic ISSN: 1432-1920
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00234-012-1035-7

Other articles of this Issue 8/2012

Neuroradiology 8/2012 Go to the issue