Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dsjbd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T06:54:06.979Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Influence of the sagittal anatomy of the pelvis on the intercrestal line position

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 March 2008

M. Horduna  and
J. Legaye
M. Horduna
Affiliation:
University Hospital of Amiens, Department of Anaesthesia, Amiens, France
J. Legaye*
Affiliation:
University Hospital UCL Mont-Godinne, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Yvoir, Belgium
*
Correspondence to: Jean Legaye, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University Hospital UCL Mont-Godinne, B-5530 Yvoir, Belgium. E-mail: [email protected]; Tel: +32 81 42 30 91; Fax: +32 81 42 30 80
Get access

Summary

Background and objective

The line joining the two iliac crests is classically regarded as the anatomical landmark determining the inter-vertebral space L4–L5 for the spinal punctures. Its variability has been reported but never related to predictive clinical anatomic factors identifying patients groups in which there is increased risk of miscalculation of the spinal level.

Methods

Two sagittal pelvic anatomical angles, called ‘pelvic incidence’ and ‘pelvic lordosis’ were measured on lateral X-rays of the pelvis of 132 normal individuals and 49 spondylolysis patients. The values were compared with the sagittal projection of the intercrestal line on the disco-vertebral lumbar structures.

Results

A strict relation was observed between this projection of the intercrestal line and the sagittal pelvic anatomical angles. The greater the pelvic incidence, the higher the intercrestal line was projected, all the more in patients with spondylolysis with a listhesis or a disc narrowing.

Conclusions

The relation between the pelvic sagittal angles and the intercrestal line projection explains the variability described for this anatomical landmark. It implies precautions minimizing neurological risk in the case of a puncture carried out more cranially than expected, particularly for high values of pelvic incidence occurring in spinal pathologies such as spondylolysis, in the elderly or in the obese patients. In these cases, we recommend the use of spinal imaging during the procedure to assist selection of the desired insertion level.

Keywords

ANAESTHESIA CONDUCTIONSPINAL ANAESTHESIAPELVISANATOMY
Type
Original Article
Information
European Journal of Anaesthesiology , Volume 25 , Issue 3 , March 2008 , pp. 200 - 205
Copyright
Copyright © European Society of Anaesthesiology 2008

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1.Kubota, Y, Toyoda, Y, Kubota, H. Jacoby’s line rather than Tuffier’s line as a guide to lumbar puncture. Anesth Analg 1992; 74: 939.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2.Ievins, FA. Accuracy of placement of extradural needles in the L3–L4 interspace: comparison of two methods of identifying L4. Br J Anaesth 1991; 66: 381–382.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3.Renders, CA. The reproducibility of the iliac crest as a marker of lumbar spine level. Anaesthesia 1996; 51: 1070–1071.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4.Walsh, JC, Quinlan, JF, Butt, K, Towers, M, Devitt, AT. Variation in the position of the L4/L5 disc inter-space from anatomical landmark: review of 450 radiographs and clinical applications. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol 2006; 16: 203–206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
5.Evans, RW. Complications of lumbar puncture. Neurol Clin 1998; 16: 83–105.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
6.Legaye, J, Duval-Beaupere, G, Hecquet, J, Marty, C. Pelvic incidence: a fundamental pelvic parameter for three-dimensional regulation of spinal sagittal curves. Eur Spine J 1998; 7: 99–103.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
7.Roussouly, P, Gollogly, S, Berthonnaud, E, Dimnet, J. Classification of the normal variation in the sagittal alignment of the human lumbar spine and pelvis in the standing position. Spine 2005; 30: 346–353.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
8.Jackson, RP, Hales, C. Congruent spinopelvic alignment on standing lateral radiographs of adult volunteers. Spine 2000; 25: 2808–2815.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
9.Jackson, RP, Peterson, MD, McManus, AC, Hales, C. Compensatory spinopelvic balance over the hip axis and better reliability in measuring lordosis to the pelvic radius on standing lateral radiographs of adult volunteers and patients. Spine 1998; 23: 1750–1767.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10.Shiraishi, N, Matsumura, G. What is the true location of Jacoby’s line? Okajimas Folia Anat Jpn 2006; 82: 111–115.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
11.Lirk, P, Messner, H, Deibl, M et al. . Accuracy in estimating the correct intervertebral space level during lumbar, thoracic and cervical epidural anaesthesia. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 2004; 48: 347–349.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
12.Broadbent, CR, Maxwell, WB, Ferrie, R, Wilson, DJ, Gawne-Cain, M, Russell, R. Ability of anaesthetists to identify a marked lumbar interspace. Anaesthesia 2000; 55: 1122–1126.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
13.Van Gessel, EF, Forster, A, Gamulin, Z. Continuous spinal anaesthesia: where do spinal catheters go? Anesth Analg 1993; 76: 1004–1007.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
14.Kim, JT, Jung, CW, Lee, JR, Min, SW, Bahk, JH. Influence of lumbar flexion on the position of the intercrestal line. Reg Anesth Pain Med 2003; 28: 509–511.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
15.Chin, KR, Kuntz, AF, Bohlman, HH, Emery, SE. Changes in the iliac crest – lumbar relationship from standing to prone. Spine J 2006; 6: 185–189.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
16.Kim, JT, Bahk, JH, Sung, J. Influence of age and sex on the position of the conus medullaris and Tuffier’s line in adults. Anesthesiology 2003; 99: 1359–1363.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
17.Parry, H. Spinal cord damage. Anaesthesia 2001; 56: 290.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed