STUDY DESIGN: A radiologic study of sacropelvic morphology and vacuum phenomenon of sacroiliac joint in subjects unrelated to low back pain. PURPOSE: The aim of this study is to describe the relationship between sacropelvic morphology and vacuum phenomenon of the sacroiliac joint. OVERVIEW OF LITERATURE: Lumbopelvic alignment and sacropelvic morphology are associated with the pathomechanisms of various spinal disorders. The vacuum phenomena of the sacroiliac joint (SJVP) are often observed in clinical practice, but the relationships between these phenomena and sacropelvic morphology have not been investigated. This study examined the prevalence of SJVP in computed tomography (CT) images and the relationship between sacropelvic morphology and SJVP. METHODS: We analyzed multiplanar CT images of 93 subjects (59 men, 34 women). Pelvic incidence (PI), pelvic tilt (PT), sacral slope (SS), and lumbar lordosis (LL) were measured using the three-dimensional reconstruction method. The prevalence of SJVP in multiplanar CT images were reviewed. Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire (RDQ) scores and the modified Japanese Orthopedic Association (JOA) score, which focuses on subjective symptoms and restriction of activities of daily living, were also obtained from all the subjects. RESULTS: Thirty-six of the 93 subjects had SJVP (39%), with marked female predominance (91% women, 8.5% men). Men with SJVP had significantly lower PI than men without SJVP (35.1° vs. 46.3°, p<0.05). There was no correlation between SJVP and the modified JOA or RDQ scores. CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest that differences in sacropelvic morphology can influence the biomechanical environment and contribute to SJVP in men. Presence of SJVP did not affect JOA or RDQ scores.
Activities of Daily Living ; Animals ; Asian Continental Ancestry Group ; Female ; Humans ; Incidence ; Lordosis ; Low Back Pain ; Lumbosacral Region ; Male ; Methods ; Orthopedics ; Pelvis ; Prevalence ; Sacroiliac Joint* ; Vacuum*

STUDY DESIGN: Prospective study. PURPOSE: During fluoroscopically guided spinal procedure, the hands of spinal surgeons are placed close to the field of radiation and may be exposed to ionizing radiation. This study directly measured the radiation exposure to the hand of a spinal interventionalist during fluoroscopically guided procedures. OVERVIEW OF LITERATURE: Fluoroscopically guided spinal procedures have been reported to be a cause for concern due to the radiation exposure to which their operators are exposed. METHODS: This prospective study evaluated the radiation exposure of the hand of one spinal interventionalist during 52 consecutive fluoroscopic spinal procedures over a 3-month period. The interventionalist wore three real-time dosimeters secured to the right forearm, under the lead apron over the chest, and outside the lead apron over the chest. Additionally, one radiophotoluminescence glass dosimeter was placed under the lead apron over the left chest and one ring radiophotoluminescence glass dosimeter was worn on the right thumb. The duration of exposure and radiation dose were measured for each procedure. RESULTS: The average radiation exposure dose per procedure was 14.9 µSv, 125.6 µSv, and 200.1 µSv, inside the lead apron over the chest, outside the lead apron over the chest, and on the right forearm, respectively. Over the 3-month period, the protected radiophotoluminescence glass dosimeter over the left chest recorded less than the minimum reportable dose, whereas the radiophotoluminescence glass ring dosimeter recorded 368 mSv for the thumb. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings indicated that the cumulative radiation dose measured at the dominant hand may exceed the annual dose limit specified by the International Commission on Radiological Protection. Spinal interventionalists should take special care to limit the duration of fluoroscopy and radiation exposure.
Fingers ; Fluoroscopy ; Forearm ; Glass ; Hand* ; Prospective Studies ; Radiation Exposure* ; Radiation, Ionizing ; Surgeons ; Thorax ; Thumb