无症状中国年轻人颈椎矢状位曲度正常值及其与全脊柱平衡的关系

doi:10.19723/j.issn.1671-167X.2022.04.021

Abstract

Abstract:

Objective: To explore the normal distribution of cervical sagittal alignment and the relationship between cervical alignment and global spine balance in asymptomatic young adults. Methods: A cohort of 272 asymptomatic Chinese adults (including 161 males and 111 females, with an average age of (23.2±4.4) years, ranging from 18 to 45 years) were prospectively recruited from November 2011 to December 2014. The C₀-C₂ angle, disk angles from C₂-C₃ to C₆-C₇, vertebral angles from C₃ to C₇, T₁ slope, thoracic kyphosis (TK), lumbar lordosis (LL), pelvic incidence (PI), sacral slope (SS), C₂-C₇ sagittal vertical axis (C₂-C₇SVA), center of gravity of head to C₇SVA (CGH-C₇SVA), C₇-S₁SVA were measured and statistically analyzed. All the subjects were categorized with the Roussouly classification and the cervical morphologies were evaluated as lordotic, straight, sigmoid or kyphotic. Spinal sagittal alignment parameters were compared between different sexes and Roussouly classifications with independent student t test, analysis of variance (ANOVA) or Chi-square test. Correlations between cervical sagittal alignment and global spine sagittal alignment were calculated using the Pearson and Spearman correlation coefficient. Linear regression analysis was performed. Results: Sixty-seven males and 59 females aged from 18 to 30 years old were included in the study. The mean value of C₀-C₇ was 26.0°±12.8°, composed of 15.2°±6.7° for C₀-C₂, 9.1°±12.1° for sum of disk angles from C₂-C₃ to C₆-C₇, and 1.4°±10.2° for sum of vertebral angles from C₃ to C₇. C₂-C₇SVA [(18.6±7.9) mm] and CGH-C₇SVA [(22.9±12.3) mm]were offset ideally by C₇-S₁SVA [(-21.6±31.0) mm]. Males had a larger T₁ slope (P < 0.05) and accordingly, a larger cervical lordosis C₂-C₇ (P < 0.01) and C₀-C₇ angle (P < 0.01) than females. Males had a smaller C₇-S₁SVA (P < 0.01) and accordingly, a smaller CGH-C₇SVA (P=0.165) than females. Significant difference was found between cervical alignment of different Roussouly types (P < 0.01). In general, a larger LL was consistent with a set of larger TK, C₂-C₇angle, C₀-C₇ angle, and vice versa. There was no significant correlation between cervical morphology and the Roussouly classification (Chi-square=10.548, P=0.308). There was significant correlation between cervical alignment and T₁ slope (P < 0.01), TK (P < 0.01). There was significant correlation between adjacent segmental angles from T₁ slope up to C₀-C₂ angle (P < 0.05). Conclusion: Normative values of each vertebral angle and disk angle were established. The cervical lordosis occurred mainly at C₀-C₂ and disk levels, which was influenced by parameters of other parts of the spine, such as T₁ slope, TK and the Roussouly classification. There was significant correlation between adjacent disk angles.

Key words: Cervical spine, Sagittal alignment, Disk angle, Vertebral angle, Global spine balance

CLC Number:

R681.5

Yan-chao TANG,Wen-kui ZHAO,Miao YU,Xiao-guang LIU. Normative values of cervical sagittal alignment according to the whole spine balance: Based on 126 asymptomatic Chinese young adults[J].Journal of Peking University (Health Sciences), 2022, 54(4): 712-718.

Figures/Tables 7

Figure 1

Table 1

Figure 2

Table 2

Table 3

Table 4

Table 5

References 24

1	Le Huec JC , Demezon H , Aunoble S . Sagittal parameters of global cervical balance using EOS imaging: normative values from a prospective cohort of asymptomatic volunteers[J]. Eur Spine J, 2015, 24 (1): 63- 71. doi: 10.1007/s00586-014-3632-0
2	Lee SH , Son ES , Seo EM , et al. Factors determining cervical spine sagittal balance in asymptomatic adults: correlation with spinopelvic balance and thoracic inlet alignment[J]. Spine J, 2015, 15 (4): 705- 712. doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2013.06.059
3	Nunez-Pereira S , Hitzl W , Bullmann V , et al. Sagittal balance of the cervical spine: an analysis of occipitocervical and spinopelvic interdependence, with C-7 slope as a marker of cervical and spinopelvic alignment[J]. J Neurosurg Spine, 2015, 23 (1): 16- 23. doi: 10.3171/2014.11.SPINE14368
4	Sakai K , Yoshii T , Hirai T , et al. Cervical sagittal imbalance is a predictor of kyphotic deformity after laminoplasty in cervical spondylotic myelopathy patients without preoperative kyphotic alignment[J]. Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 2016, 41 (4): 299- 305. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000001206
5	Kato M , Namikawa T , Matsumura A , et al. Effect of cervical sagittal balance on laminoplasty in patients with cervical myelopathy[J]. Global Spine J, 2017, 7 (2): 154- 161. doi: 10.1177/2192568217694011
6	Theologis AA , Iyer S , Lenke LG , et al. Cervical and cervicothoracic sagittal alignment according to Roussouly thoracolumbar subtypes[J]. Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 2019, 44 (11): E634- E639. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000002941
7	Pepke W , Almansour H , Lafage R , et al. Cervical spine alignment following surgery for adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS): A pre-to-post analysis of 81 patients[J]. BMC Surg, 2019, 19 (1): 7. doi: 10.1186/s12893-019-0471-2
8	Khalil N , Bizdikian AJ , Bakouny Z , et al. Cervical and postural strategies for maintaining horizontal gaze in asymptomatic adults[J]. Eur Spine J, 2018, 27 (11): 2700- 2709. doi: 10.1007/s00586-018-5753-3
9	Yu M , Zhao WK , Li M , et al. Analysis of cervical and global spine alignment under Roussouly sagittal classification in Chinese cervical spondylotic patients and asymptomatic subjects[J]. Eur Spine J, 2015, 24 (6): 1265- 1273. doi: 10.1007/s00586-015-3832-2
10	Hardacker JW , Shuford RF , Capicotto PN , et al. Radiographic standing cervical segmental alignment in adult volunteers without neck symptoms[J]. Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 1997, 22 (13): 1472- 1480. doi: 10.1097/00007632-199707010-00009
11	Ohara A , Miyamoto K , Naganawa T , et al. Reliabilities of and correlations among five standard methods of assessing the sagittal alignment of the cervical spine[J]. Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 2006, 31 (22): 2585. doi: 10.1097/01.brs.0000240656.79060.18
12	Roussouly P , Gollogly S , Berthonnaud E , et al. Classification of the normal variation in the sagittal alignment of the human lumbar spine and pelvis in the standing position[J]. Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 2005, 30 (3): 346- 353. doi: 10.1097/01.brs.0000152379.54463.65
13	Diebo BG , Challier V , Henry JK , et al. Predicting cervical alignment required to maintain horizontal gaze based on global spinal alignment[J]. Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 2016, 41 (23): 1795- 1800. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000001698
14	Patwardhan AG , Khayatzadeh S , Havey RM , et al. Cervical sagittal balance: a biomechanical perspective can help clinical practice[J]. Eur Spine J, 2018, 27 (Suppl 1): 25- 38.
15	Nori S , Shiraishi T , Aoyama R , et al. Upper cervical lordosis compensates lower cervical kyphosis to maintain whole cervical lordosis after selective laminectomy[J]. J Clin Neurosci, 2018, 58, 64- 69. doi: 10.1016/j.jocn.2018.10.049
16	Kim JT , Lee HJ , Choi DY , et al. Sequential alignment change of the cervical spine after anterior cervical discectomy and fusion in the lower cervical spine[J]. Eur Spine J, 2016, 25 (7): 2223- 2232. doi: 10.1007/s00586-016-4401-z
17	Kim JH , Park JY , Yi S , et al. Anterior cervical discectomy and fusion alters whole-spine sagittal alignment[J]. Yonsei Med J, 2015, 56 (4): 1060- 1070. doi: 10.3349/ymj.2015.56.4.1060
18	Tang R , Ye IB , Cheung ZB , et al. Age-related changes in cervical sagittal alignment: A radiographic analysis[J]. Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 2019, 44 (19): E1144- E1150. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000003082
19	Iyer S , Lenke LG , Nemani VM , et al. Variations in occipitocervical and cervicothoracic alignment parameters based on age: A prospective study of asymptomatic volunteers using full-body radiographs[J]. Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 2016, 41 (23): 1837- 1844. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000001644
20	Yang BS , Lee SK , Song KS , et al. The use of T1 sagittal angle in predicting cervical disc degeneration[J]. Asian Spine J, 2015, 9 (5): 757- 761. doi: 10.4184/asj.2015.9.5.757
21	Mac-Thiong JM , Roussouly P , Berthonnaud E , et al. Sagittal parameters of global spinal balance: normative values from a prospective cohort of seven hundred nine Caucasian asymptomatic adults[J]. Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 2010, 35 (22): E1193- E1198. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181e50808
22	Lee CS , Chung SS , Kang KC , et al. Normal patterns of sagittal alignment of the spine in young adults radiological analysis in a Korean population[J]. Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 2011, 36 (25): E1648- E1654. doi: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e318216b0fd
23	Zhu Z , Xu L , Zhu F , et al. Sagittal alignment of spine and pelvis in asymptomatic adults: norms in Chinese populations[J]. Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 2014, 39 (1): E1- E6.
24	Gutman G , Labelle H , Barchi S , et al. Normal sagittal parameters of global spinal balance in children and adolescents: A prospective study of 646 asymptomatic subjects[J]. Eur Spine J, 2016, 25 (11): 3650- 3657.

Metrics

Viewed

Full text

Abstract

Cited

Shared

Discussed

Comments

Recommended 0

No Suggested Reading articles found!

Parameter and demographics	Female (n=59)	Male (n=67)	P	Total (n=126)
Age/years	21.1±2.4	21.6±2.2	0.294	21.4±2.3
Height/mm	163.2±4.4	175.4±5.5	< 0.001^*	169.7±7.9
Weight/kg	52.7±6.0	66.3±8.3	< 0.001^*	60.0±9.9
BMI	19.8±2.1	21.5±2.1	< 0.001^*	20.7±2.3
Cervical alignment
C₀-C₂/(°)	15.5±7.3	14.9±6.2	0.480	15.2±6.7
C₂-C₃/(°)	1.0±3.3	2.3±3.5	0.034^*	1.7±3.5
C₃/(°)	0.2±3.7	0.9±3.4	0.307	0.6±3.5
C₃-C₄/(°)	1.3±3.7	1.0±3.8	0.662	1.1±3.7
C₄/(°)	-0.9±3.2	0.8±3.6	0.005^#	0.0±3.5
C₄-C₅/(°)	0.4±2.9	1.2±3.9	0.177	0.8±3.5
C₅/(°)	-1.8±3.3	-0.5±3.4	0.027^*	-1.1±3.4
C₅-C₆/(°)	0.9±3.9	1.8±3.3	0.176	1.4±3.6
C₆/(°)	-0.6±3.2	-0.3±3.5	0.601	-0.4±3.3
C₆-C₇/(°)	4.0±3.6	4.2±3.7	0.810	4.1±3.7
C₇/(°)	2.1±2.8	2.6±2.7	0.230	2.4±2.8
C₂-C₇/(°)	6.6±13.1	14.1±13.2	0.002^#	10.6±13.6
C₀-C₇/(°)	22.6±11.1	28.9±13.5	0.006^#	26.0±12.8
T₁ slope/(°)	24.7±7.4	27.4±6.5	0.034^*	26.1±7.0
C₂-C₇SVA/mm	18.9±6.3	18.3±9.1	0.674	18.6±7.9
CGH-C₇SVA/mm	24.5±11.5	21.4±12.9	0.165	22.9±12.3
Whole spine alignment
TK/(°)	24.4±7.2	24.8±7.1	0.779	24.6±7.1
LL/(°)	47.9±9.5	48.1±9.9	0.871	48.0±9.7
PI/(°)	48.1±8.3	47.6±8.4	0.717	47.8±8.3
SS/(°)	36.9±6.7	37.9±7.3	0.415	37.4±7.0
PT/(°)	10.9±5.6	9.7±6.6	0.254	10.3±6.2
C₇-S₁ SVA/mm	-29.1±30.9	-14.9±29.7	0.009^#	-21.6±31.0

Parameter	Type 1 (n=20)	Type 2 (n=42)	Type 3 (n=42)	Type 4 (n=22)	P
SS/(°)	< 35°	< 35°	35°-45°	>35°	0.000^#
Cervical alignment
C₀-C₂/(°)	14.5±7.2	14.1±7.1	16.5±6.2	15.5±6.7	0.426
C₂-C₃/(°)	1.3±3.3	2.1±3.8	1.5±3.4	1.6±3.4	0.806
C₃/(°)	2.4±3.4	0.6±3.3	0.4±3.5	-0.6±3.6	0.051
C₃-C₄/(°)	1.8±4.3	0.7±3.8	0.7±3.7	2.1±3.2	0.375
C₄/(°)	1.3±3.3	0.0±3.7	-0.2±3.4	-0.8±3.6	0.250
C₄-C₅/(°)	1.9±2.9	0.0±4.1	0.5±3.1	2.3±3.1	0.036^*
C₅/(°)	-0.2±3.4	-1.2±3.2	-1.4±3.4	-1.3±3.9	0.626
C₅-C₆/(°)	1.8±2.3	0.6±4.0	1.2±3.4	2.9±3.8	0.088
C₆/(°)	0.9±2.6	-1.1±3.3	-0.5±4.0	0.0±2.2	0.142
C₆-C₇/(°)	4.5±3.0	3.9±4.3	3.5±3.0	5.3±3.8	0.246
C₇/(°)	3.3±2.7	2.3±2.6	2.0±3.1	2.3±2.2	0.388
C₂-C₇/(°)	18.9±14.1	7.8±14.2	7.7±11.1	13.9±13.5	0.005^#
C₀-C₇/(°)	33.4±11.5	21.9±14.5	24.7±10.0	29.4±12.2	0.004^#
T₁ slope/(°)	27.8±7.2	24.3±7.3	26.7±6.4	27.1±7.0	0.204
C₂-C₇ SVA/mm	17.5±9.6	19.3±7.3	19.4±7.9	16.7±7.4	0.499
CGH-C₇ SVA/mm	19.1±15.9	23.3±10.5	24.3±12.5	22.8±11.4	0.485
Whole spine alignment
TK/(°)	25.9±7.6	20.9±7.1	26.0±6.3	27.8±5.5	0.000^#
LL/(°)	47.3±10.0	43.9±9.1	49.7±9.0	53.3±8.9	0.001^#
PI/(°)	43.3±5.9	43.6±7.0	50.7±7.4	54.7±7.6	0.000^#
SS/(°)	33.0±7.1	34.1±4.3	38.4±5.3	46.0±6.3	0.000^#
PT/(°)	10.4±6.0	9.5±5.5	12.0±6.7	8.5±6.1	0.126
C₇-S₁SVA/mm	-28.2±27.5	-19.4±31.9	-24.5±33.2	-14.1±27.7	0.436

Items	Lordotic	Straight	Sigmoid	Kyphotic	Total
Type 1	9	9	0	2	20
Type 2	14	22	0	6	42
Type 3	7	28	2	5	42
Type 4	9	11	1	1	22
Total	39	70	3	14	126

Items	C₂-C₇	C₀-C₇	C₂-C₇SVA	CGH-C₇SVA
T₁ slope	0.419^#	0.463^#	0.274^#	0.209^*
TK	0.240^#	0.319^#	0.166	-0.048
LL	0.015	0.115	0.052	0.026
PI	-0.071	-0.020	-0.009	0.045
SS	-0.011	0.029	0.019	0.019
C₇-S₁SVA	0.159	0.058	-0.025	-0.022

	C₀-C₂	C₂-C₃	C₃-C₄	C₄-C₅	C₅-C₆	C₆-C₇	C₂-C₇	C₀-C₇	T₁ slope
C₀-C₂	1	-0.364^#	-0.206^*	-0.222^*	-0.132	-0.113	-0.349^#	0.158	0.079
C₂-C₃		1	0.408^#	0.273^#	0.128	0.031	0.417^#	0.248^#	0.058
C₃-C₄			1	0.544^#	0.469^#	0.186^*	0.525^#	0.449^#	0.175
C₄-C₅				1	0.610^#	0.215^*	0.632^#	0.564^#	0.322^#
C₅-C₆					1	0.349^*	0.488^#	0.439^#	0.353^#
C₆-C₇						1	0.280^#	0.226^*	0.074
C₂-C₇							1	0.870^#	0.419^#
C₀-C₇								1	0.463^#
T₁ slope									1

Normative values of cervical sagittal alignment according to the whole spine balance: Based on 126 asymptomatic Chinese young adults

RICH HTML

PDF (PC)

Abstract

Cite this article

share this article

Figures/Tables 7

References 24

Related Articles 5

Metrics

Comments

Recommended 0

[1]	ZHANG Lu,HU Xiao-hong,CHEN Cheng,CAI Yue-ming,WANG Qing-wen,ZHAO Jin-xia. Analysis of cervical instability and clinical characteristics in treatment-naive rheumatoid arthritis patients [J]. Journal of Peking University (Health Sciences), 2021, 53(6): 1049-1054.
[2]	Lu ZHANG,Xiao-hong HU,Qing-wen WANG,Yue-ming CAI,Jin-xia ZHAO,Xiang-yuan LIU. Population distribution and clinical characteristics in rheumatoid arthritis patients with cervical spine instability [J]. Journal of Peking University (Health Sciences), 2020, 52(6): 1034-1039.
[3]	Yong-zheng HAN,Feng-yun JING,Mao XU,Xiang-yang GUO. Anesthesia management of cervical chordoma resection: A case report [J]. Journal of Peking University(Health Sciences), 2019, 51(5): 981-983.
[4]	Hong HONG,Yu-ting QIAN,Lei FU,Wu WANG,Cheng-hui LI,Yi-qing YIN. Study on the use of CT three-dimensional reconstruction technique for guiding tracheal intubation with rigid fiber bronchoscope in difficult airway [J]. Journal of Peking University(Health Sciences), 2019, 51(5): 870-874.
[5]	Chao WU,Zhen-yu WANG,Guo-zhong LIN,Tao YU,Bin LIU,Yu SI,Yi-bo ZHANG,Yuan-chao LI. Biomechanical changes of sheep cervical spine after unilateral hemilaminectomy and different degrees of facetectomy [J]. Journal of Peking University(Health Sciences), 2019, 51(4): 728-732.