Cargando…

Is Sacralization Really a Cause of Low Back Pain?

Objective. The aim of this study was to determine, by plain radiography, if there is a relationship between sacralization and low back pain. Methods. Five hundred lumbosacral radiographs of low back pain patients and 500 control groups were examined. Data collection consisted of the subject's a...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Bulut, Mehmet, Uçar, Bekir Yavuz, Uçar, Demet, Azboy, İbrahim, Demirtaş, Abdullah, Alemdar, Celil, Gem, Mehmet, Özkul, Emin
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Hindawi Publishing Corporation 2013
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4045288/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24967117
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2013/839013
_version_ 1782319289452199936
author Bulut, Mehmet
Uçar, Bekir Yavuz
Uçar, Demet
Azboy, İbrahim
Demirtaş, Abdullah
Alemdar, Celil
Gem, Mehmet
Özkul, Emin
author_facet Bulut, Mehmet
Uçar, Bekir Yavuz
Uçar, Demet
Azboy, İbrahim
Demirtaş, Abdullah
Alemdar, Celil
Gem, Mehmet
Özkul, Emin
author_sort Bulut, Mehmet
collection PubMed
description Objective. The aim of this study was to determine, by plain radiography, if there is a relationship between sacralization and low back pain. Methods. Five hundred lumbosacral radiographs of low back pain patients and 500 control groups were examined. Data collection consisted of the subject's age at the time of imaging, gender, number of lumbar vertebral bodies, and bilateral height measurement of the lowest lumbar transverse process. Dysplastic transverse processes were classified according to the Castellvi radiographic classification system. The incidence of sacralization in patients and the control groups was reported, and the anomaly was compared according to the groups. Results. Of these patients groups, 106 were classified as positive for sacralization, which resulted in an incidence of 21.2%. The most common anatomical variant was Castellvi Type IA (6.8%). In the control group, 84 were classified as positive for sacralization, which resulted in an incidence of 16.8%. No statistically significant difference was found between the groups for having sacralization (P = 0.09). Discussion. The relationship between sacralization and low back pain is not clear. Because of this controversial future studies need to focus on identifying other parameters that are relevant to distinguishing lumbosacral variation, as well as corroborating the results obtained here with data from other samples.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4045288
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2013
publisher Hindawi Publishing Corporation
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-40452882014-06-25 Is Sacralization Really a Cause of Low Back Pain? Bulut, Mehmet Uçar, Bekir Yavuz Uçar, Demet Azboy, İbrahim Demirtaş, Abdullah Alemdar, Celil Gem, Mehmet Özkul, Emin ISRN Orthop Clinical Study Objective. The aim of this study was to determine, by plain radiography, if there is a relationship between sacralization and low back pain. Methods. Five hundred lumbosacral radiographs of low back pain patients and 500 control groups were examined. Data collection consisted of the subject's age at the time of imaging, gender, number of lumbar vertebral bodies, and bilateral height measurement of the lowest lumbar transverse process. Dysplastic transverse processes were classified according to the Castellvi radiographic classification system. The incidence of sacralization in patients and the control groups was reported, and the anomaly was compared according to the groups. Results. Of these patients groups, 106 were classified as positive for sacralization, which resulted in an incidence of 21.2%. The most common anatomical variant was Castellvi Type IA (6.8%). In the control group, 84 were classified as positive for sacralization, which resulted in an incidence of 16.8%. No statistically significant difference was found between the groups for having sacralization (P = 0.09). Discussion. The relationship between sacralization and low back pain is not clear. Because of this controversial future studies need to focus on identifying other parameters that are relevant to distinguishing lumbosacral variation, as well as corroborating the results obtained here with data from other samples. Hindawi Publishing Corporation 2013-02-07 /pmc/articles/PMC4045288/ /pubmed/24967117 http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2013/839013 Text en Copyright © 2013 Mehmet Bulut et al. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/ This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Clinical Study
Bulut, Mehmet
Uçar, Bekir Yavuz
Uçar, Demet
Azboy, İbrahim
Demirtaş, Abdullah
Alemdar, Celil
Gem, Mehmet
Özkul, Emin
Is Sacralization Really a Cause of Low Back Pain?
title Is Sacralization Really a Cause of Low Back Pain?
title_full Is Sacralization Really a Cause of Low Back Pain?
title_fullStr Is Sacralization Really a Cause of Low Back Pain?
title_full_unstemmed Is Sacralization Really a Cause of Low Back Pain?
title_short Is Sacralization Really a Cause of Low Back Pain?
title_sort is sacralization really a cause of low back pain?
topic Clinical Study
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4045288/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24967117
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2013/839013
work_keys_str_mv AT bulutmehmet issacralizationreallyacauseoflowbackpain
AT ucarbekiryavuz issacralizationreallyacauseoflowbackpain
AT ucardemet issacralizationreallyacauseoflowbackpain
AT azboyibrahim issacralizationreallyacauseoflowbackpain
AT demirtasabdullah issacralizationreallyacauseoflowbackpain
AT alemdarcelil issacralizationreallyacauseoflowbackpain
AT gemmehmet issacralizationreallyacauseoflowbackpain
AT ozkulemin issacralizationreallyacauseoflowbackpain