Skip to main content
Advertisement

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Accepted Manuscripts
    • Article Preview
    • Past Issue Archive
    • AJNR Case Collection
    • Case of the Week Archive
    • Classic Case Archive
    • Case of the Month Archive
  • Special Collections
    • Spinal CSF Leak Articles (Jan 2020-June 2024)
    • 2024 AJNR Journal Awards
    • Most Impactful AJNR Articles
  • Multimedia
    • AJNR Podcast
    • AJNR Scantastics
    • Video Articles
  • For Authors
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Author Policies
    • Fast publishing of Accepted Manuscripts
    • Graphical Abstract Preparation
    • Manuscript Submission Guidelines
    • Imaging Protocol Submission
    • Submit a Case for the Case Collection
  • About Us
    • About AJNR
    • Editorial Board
  • More
    • Become a Reviewer/Academy of Reviewers
    • Subscribers
    • Permissions
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
    • Advertisers
    • ASNR Home
  • Other Publications
    • ajnr

User menu

  • Alerts
  • Log in

Search

  • Advanced search
American Journal of Neuroradiology
American Journal of Neuroradiology

American Journal of Neuroradiology

ASHNR American Society of Functional Neuroradiology ASHNR American Society of Pediatric Neuroradiology ASSR
  • Alerts
  • Log in

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Accepted Manuscripts
    • Article Preview
    • Past Issue Archive
    • AJNR Case Collection
    • Case of the Week Archive
    • Classic Case Archive
    • Case of the Month Archive
  • Special Collections
    • Spinal CSF Leak Articles (Jan 2020-June 2024)
    • 2024 AJNR Journal Awards
    • Most Impactful AJNR Articles
  • Multimedia
    • AJNR Podcast
    • AJNR Scantastics
    • Video Articles
  • For Authors
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Author Policies
    • Fast publishing of Accepted Manuscripts
    • Graphical Abstract Preparation
    • Manuscript Submission Guidelines
    • Imaging Protocol Submission
    • Submit a Case for the Case Collection
  • About Us
    • About AJNR
    • Editorial Board
  • More
    • Become a Reviewer/Academy of Reviewers
    • Subscribers
    • Permissions
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
    • Advertisers
    • ASNR Home
  • Follow AJNR on Twitter
  • Visit AJNR on Facebook
  • Follow AJNR on Instagram
  • Join AJNR on LinkedIn
  • RSS Feeds

Welcome to the new AJNR, Updated Hall of Fame, and more. Read the full announcements.


AJNR is seeking candidates for the position of Associate Section Editor, AJNR Case Collection. Read the full announcement.

 

Research ArticleSPINE

An Easily Identifiable Anatomic Landmark For Fluoroscopically Guided Sacroplasty: Anatomic Description and Validation with Treatment in 13 Patients

M.V. Jayaraman, H. Chang and S.H. Ahn
American Journal of Neuroradiology May 2009, 30 (5) 1070-1073; DOI: https://doi.org/10.3174/ajnr.A1502
M.V. Jayaraman
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
H. Chang
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
S.H. Ahn
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • Responses
  • References
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Percutaneous sacroplasty has recently gained attention as a potential treatment for sacral insufficiency fractures. We describe a readily identifiable fluoroscopic landmark that facilitates needle placement and validate this with virtual needle placement by using CT data and fluoroscopically guided treatment in 13 patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: From CTs of 100 consecutive patients, the optimal target zone for needle placement in the sacral ala was defined at the intersection of lines from each of the corners of the first sacral segment, which is readily identifiable on lateral fluoroscopy. We then measured the distance from that virtual target point to the anterior sacral cortex by using the CT data for 3 specific trajectories: 1) parallel to the L5-S1 disk, 2) axial with respect to the patient, and 3) along the long axis of the sacrum. Case records of 13 consecutive patients treated by using this technique were also reviewed.

RESULTS: The mean distances for the 3 trajectories were 11.3 mm, 11.2 mm, and 12.8 mm, respectively. Needle placement would have been outside the anterior sacral cortex in 3 patients. Review of preprocedure imaging easily identified this potential breach. During treatment, needle placement by using the landmark was successful in all patients, and there were no complications.

CONCLUSIONS: A safe target for sacroplasty needle placement in the superolateral sacral ala can be defined by using the intersection of lines drawn from the corners of the first sacral segment. We validated this landmark by using it for treatment in 13 patients. Further studies evaluating clinical outcomes following sacroplasty will be necessary.

Percutaneous sacroplasty has recently gained attention as a treatment option for patients with sacral insufficiency fractures, similar in concept to vertebroplasty for vertebral compression fractures.1-7 However, the complex anatomy of the sacrum makes needle placement more difficult using traditional fluoroscopy alone as compared with vertebroplasty in the thoracic or lumbar spine. Several recent reports have advocated the use of CT including CT fluoroscopy, whereas others have used a combination of CT and a portable C-arm fluoroscopy unit,1-3,8 with CT guidance for needle placement and fluoroscopy for evaluation of cement filling. Fluoroscopy alone can be used, but breach of the anterior sacral wall (how deep the needle should be placed) is often the greatest concern when using this approach.

Fluoroscopic guidance has advantages with respect to superior visualization of cement during injection, but needle placement landmarks for the sacrum are not well defined. A recent report described the technique of orienting the needle parallel to the sacroiliac joint and the L5-S1 disk space,9 but it did not address the issue of how far anteriorly the needle could be safely advanced, to avoid extending beyond the anterior sacral cortex. Techniques along the long axis of the sacrum have also been reported, with a similar goal of placing cement primarily in the superior sacral segments and extending inferiorly.10 In this report, we describe a simple anatomic landmark that can be used to guide needle placement for fluoroscopically guided percutaneous sacroplasty, and we validate this landmark with data from retrospective review of thin-section CT scans. This landmark is also independent of the craniocaudal angle chosen and can be equally well used with the long-axis injection technique and the short-axis (parallel to the L5-S1 disk) technique. We also validated that landmark by using it as our fluoroscopic target in 13 consecutive cases.

Materials and Methods

Imaging Analysis

Institutional review board approval was obtained for this retrospective analysis. One hundred consecutive CT scans of adult patients in whom thin-section images of the pelvis were obtained were selected by review of the hospital PACS system. These were transferred to an Advantage Windows workstation (GE Healthcare, Milwaukee, Wis) for multiplanar reformatted image analysis. We defined the ideal target zone for needle placement as the intersection of lines from the corners of the first sacral segment (Fig 1). Virtual needle placement was performed for each hemisacrum by using 3 possible trajectories: 1) parallel to the L5-S1 disk, 2) axial with respect to the patient, and 3) along the long axis of the sacrum. For all 3 trajectories, it was anticipated that the medial-to-lateral orientation of the needle would be parallel to the sacroiliac joint, which avoids the joint and facilitates placement into the superolateral sacral ala.9

Fig 1.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Fig 1.

Demonstration of measurements made during virtual needle placement on a CT scan of the pelvis in a 65-year-old woman. A, On a sagittal midline reconstructed image, note the target (asterisk) by the intersection of line A (from the posterosuperior corner of S1 to the anteroinferior corner of S1) with line B (from the anterosuperior corner of S1 to the posteroinferior corner of S1). Three possible needle trajectories have been described and are indicated by the numbered white lines: 1) parallel to the L5-S1 disk space, 2) neutral or axial with respect to the patient, and 3) along the sacral long axis. B, Axial image taken along line 2 (axial plane) from the same patient demonstrates the target zones (asterisks) for each sacral ala. Line A represents the projection of line A from the sagittal image (A). Note how the 2 needle trajectories (black lines) are both parallel to their respective sacroiliac joints. C, Sagittal oblique image obtained along a line parallel to the sacroiliac joint shows the relative location of the target (asterisk) within the lateral sacrum. The distance from the target point to the anterior sacral cortex was obtained for the 3 needle trajectories described previously.

From the target point, the distance to the anterior sacral cortex was measured, continuing along the chosen trajectory (Fig 1C). This generated 3 measurements per hemisacrum, for a total of 6 measurements per patient. All of these measurements were recorded for both sides of the sacrum. In addition, the presence of any congenital lumbosacral anomalies was also noted, such as lumbarization of the first sacral segment or other transitional anatomy. We also recorded the number of patients in whom the target point would be anterior to the anterior sacral cortex (in the presacral soft tissue). All the data were entered into an Excel (Microsoft, Redmond, Wash) spreadsheet for analysis.

Treatment Data

For patient-specific data, the records of 13 consecutive patients treated with percutaneous sacroplasty during a 24-month period were reviewed. Demographics and any complications that occurred during the procedure or any noticeable extraosseous cement deposition were noted. An example of using this landmark is highlighted in Fig 2.

Fig 2.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Fig 2.

Use of a fluoroscopic landmark in performing sacroplasty in a 76-year-old woman. A, Initial lateral image shows the needle in position at the intersection of lines as defined in Fig 1. B and C, Posttreatment frontal (B) and lateral (C) projections demonstrate polymethylmethacrylate cement in both sacral alas with no presacral extravasation.

Results

Imaging Analysis

We identified 51 male and 49 female patients, with a mean age of 67 years. The maximum, minimum, mean, and SD for each of the trajectories are summarized in Table 1. In 3 patients, needle placement in the target zone as described above would have been beyond the anterior sacral cortex. Transitional lumbosacral anatomy was present in 11 patients (11%). Six patients had lumbarization of the first sacral segment, whereas 5 patients had some element of sacralization of L5 (3 left, 1 right, 1 bilateral). Two of the 3 patients in whom the needle placement was anterior to the sacral cortex had lumbarization of S1. In addition, 5 of the 6 patients with lumbarization of S1 had measured distances below the respective mean values.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 1:

Distance measurements from a predefined target point to the anterior sacral cortex for each of the 3 trajectories described (Fig 1)*

Treatment Data

Patient demographics, sides treated, needle sizes, and any clinical or radiologic complications are summarized in Table 2. No complications were noted in any patients. All had subjective pain relief following the procedure, though objective measures were not studied.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 2:

Demographics of 13 consecutive patients treated with percutaneous sacroplasty using fluoroscopic guidance only

Discussion

Several recent case reports and small series have described excellent pain relief with sacroplasty for painful sacral insufficiency fractures. Due to the complex anatomy of the sacrum, safe needle placement can be more difficult than with vertebroplasty. Existing reports have used CT, fluoroscopy, or both for guidance of needle placement. Advantages of using fluoroscopy include better visualization of the needle trajectory in 3D, especially with biplane fluoroscopy, and easier visualization of cement dispersion during sacroplasty. Among the reported advantages of using CT for guidance is visualization of the tip of the needle in relation to the anterior sacral cortex. However, with CT, it may be more difficult to observe cement distribution during injection, given the limitations in following it in 3D with axial CT.

The optimal location for cement distribution for pain relief from sacroplasty is yet to be determined. A recent finite-element analysis showed that cement placement in the superolateral sacral ala decreased maximal principal stress by 83% and fracture gap micromotion by 48%.9 Therefore, our goal was to place cement in this location to maximize stabilization.

Needle placement for sacroplasty is defined by angles along both the craniocaudal and medial-lateral axis. The medial-lateral angulation can be defined along a line parallel to the sacroiliac joint. Various techniques for choosing the craniocaudal angulation have been described, including along the long axis of the sacrum or parallel to the L5-S1 disk space. Regardless of which trajectory is chosen, one final determinant of needle placement is the depth to which the needle should be placed. Given the difficulty in visualizing the anterior edge of the sacrum by using lateral or anterior projections, a readily identifiable landmark for depth of needle placement would greatly simplify the procedure.

There are limitations to an imaging analysis of anatomic landmarks. First, unexpected anatomic variants can exist, such as transitional lumbosacral segments. In our study, this was seen in 11% of patients. There might have been a trend toward having a reduced distance between the anterior sacral cortex and the target distance in patients with lumbarization of S1. However, it is straightforward to test this simple landmark preprocedurally in any patient in whom sacroplasty is considered. Sagittal images from CT or MR imaging studies performed preprocedurally are usually readily available, and this landmark can be verified before needle placement by placing the mouse pointer on the desired target zone and scrolling to either side to ensure that this point is always within the sacral confines (Fig 3).

Fig 3.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Fig 3.

Example of a potential breach of the anterior sacral cortex in an 88-year-old woman with lumbarization of S1. A, Midline sagittal reformatted image from a CT scan shows the target zone (arrow) within S1 as described in Fig 1. B, Left parasagittal reformatted image shows that needle placement (arrow) would be anterior to the sacral cortex.

Conclusions

We described an anatomic landmark that is readily identifiable by using lateral fluoroscopy, which can facilitate needle placement for sacroplasty. The safety of using this landmark in patients can be quickly verified by using preprocedural imaging, and we demonstrated the clinical utility by using this as a landmark in 13 patients. Further studies regarding the efficacy of sacroplasty in patients with painful insufficiency fractures will be necessary.

References

  1. ↵
    Layton KF, Thielen KR, Wald JT. Percutaneous sacroplasty using CT fluoroscopy. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2006;27:356–58
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  2. Strub WM, Hoffmann M, Ernst RJ, et al. Sacroplasty by CT and fluoroscopic guidance: is the procedure right for your patient? AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2007;28:38–41
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  3. ↵
    Binaghi S, Guntern D, Schnyder P, et al. A new, easy, fast, and safe method for CT-guided sacroplasty. Eur Radiol 2006;16:2875–78
    CrossRefPubMed
  4. Garant M. Sacroplasty: a new treatment for sacral insufficiency fracture. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2002;13:1265–67
    PubMed
  5. Pommersheim W, Huang-Hellinger F, Baker M, et al. Sacroplasty: a treatment for sacral insufficiency fractures. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2003;24:1003–07
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  6. Frey ME, DePalma MJ, Cifu DX, et al. Efficacy and safety of percutaneous sacroplasty for painful osteoporotic sacral insufficiency fractures: a prospective, multicenter trial. Spine 2007;32:1635–40
    CrossRefPubMed
  7. ↵
    Frey ME, Depalma MJ, Cifu DX, et al. Percutaneous sacroplasty for osteoporotic sacral insufficiency fractures: a prospective, multicenter, observational pilot study. Spine J 2008;8:367–73
    CrossRefPubMed
  8. ↵
    Masala S, Konda D, Massari F, et al. Sacroplasty and iliac osteoplasty under combined CT and fluoroscopic guidance. Spine 2006;31:E667–69
    CrossRefPubMed
  9. ↵
    Whitlow CT, Yazdani SK, Reedy ML, et al. Investigating sacroplasty: technical considerations and finite element analysis of polymethylmethacrylate infusion into cadaveric sacrum. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2007;28:1036–41
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  10. ↵
    Smith DK, Dix JE. Percutaneous sacroplasty: long-axis injection technique. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2006;186:1252–55
    CrossRefPubMed
  • Received November 8, 2008.
  • Accepted after revision December 13, 2008.
  • Copyright © American Society of Neuroradiology
View Abstract
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

American Journal of Neuroradiology: 30 (5)
American Journal of Neuroradiology
Vol. 30, Issue 5
May 2009
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
Advertisement
Print
Download PDF
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on American Journal of Neuroradiology.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
An Easily Identifiable Anatomic Landmark For Fluoroscopically Guided Sacroplasty: Anatomic Description and Validation with Treatment in 13 Patients
(Your Name) has sent you a message from American Journal of Neuroradiology
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the American Journal of Neuroradiology web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Cite this article
M.V. Jayaraman, H. Chang, S.H. Ahn
An Easily Identifiable Anatomic Landmark For Fluoroscopically Guided Sacroplasty: Anatomic Description and Validation with Treatment in 13 Patients
American Journal of Neuroradiology May 2009, 30 (5) 1070-1073; DOI: 10.3174/ajnr.A1502

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
0 Responses
Respond to this article
Share
Bookmark this article
An Easily Identifiable Anatomic Landmark For Fluoroscopically Guided Sacroplasty: Anatomic Description and Validation with Treatment in 13 Patients
M.V. Jayaraman, H. Chang, S.H. Ahn
American Journal of Neuroradiology May 2009, 30 (5) 1070-1073; DOI: 10.3174/ajnr.A1502
del.icio.us logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One
Purchase

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Materials and Methods
    • Results
    • Discussion
    • Conclusions
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • Responses
  • References
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • No related articles found.
  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • Multicenter study to assess the efficacy and safety of sacroplasty in patients with osteoporotic sacral insufficiency fractures or pathologic sacral lesions
  • Percutaneous sacroplasty
  • Imaging and Treatment of Sacral Insufficiency Fractures
  • Crossref (19)
  • Google Scholar

This article has been cited by the following articles in journals that are participating in Crossref Cited-by Linking.

  • Imaging and Treatment of Sacral Insufficiency Fractures
    E.M. Lyders, C.T. Whitlow, M.D. Baker, P.P. Morris
    American Journal of Neuroradiology 2010 31 2
  • Multicenter study to assess the efficacy and safety of sacroplasty in patients with osteoporotic sacral insufficiency fractures or pathologic sacral lesions
    Keith Kortman, Orlando Ortiz, Todd Miller, Allan Brook, Sean Tutton, John Mathis, Bassem Georgy
    Journal of NeuroInterventional Surgery 2013 5 5
  • Sacral kyphoplasty for the treatment of painful sacral insufficiency fractures and metastases
    Rinoo V. Shah
    The Spine Journal 2012 12 2
  • Safety and effectiveness of percutaneous sacroplasty: a single-centre experience in 58 consecutive patients with tumours or osteoporotic insufficient fractures treated under fluoroscopic guidance
    Licia Pacheco Pereira, Frédéric Clarençon, Évelyne Cormier, Michèle Rose, Beatrix Jean, Lise Le Jean, Jacques Chiras
    European Radiology 2013 23 10
  • Sacroplasty for Cancer-Associated Insufficiency Fractures
    Nelson Moussazadeh, Ilya Laufer, Timothy Werner, George Krol, Patrick Boland, Mark H. Bilsky, Eric Lis
    Neurosurgery 2015 76 4
  • Percutaneous sacroplasty
    Amar C Gupta, Albert J Yoo, Jeffrey Stone, John C Barr, Allan Brook, Sean Tutton, Orlando Ortiz, Ariel E Hirsch, Mykol Larvie, Michael E Frey, Mahesh V Jayaraman, Joshua A Hirsch
    Journal of NeuroInterventional Surgery 2012 4 5
  • Sacral Insufficiency Fractures Mimicking Lumbar Spine Pathology
    G. Sudhir, Kalra K. L., Shankar Acharya, Rupinder Chahal
    Asian Spine Journal 2016 10 3
  • Sacral radiculopathy due to cement leakage from percutaneous sacroplasty, successfully treated with surgical decompression
    Sean M. Barber, Andrew D. Livingston, David A. Cech
    Journal of Neurosurgery: Spine 2013 18 5
  • Effects of Percutaneous Sacroplasty on Pain and Mobility in Sacral Insufficiency Fracture
    Kyung-Chul Choi, Seung-Ho Shin, Dong Chan Lee, Hyeong-Ki Shim, Choon-Keun Park
    Journal of Korean Neurosurgical Society 2017 60 1
  • Percutaneous Sacroplasty for Painful Sacral Metastases Involving Multiple Sacral Vertebral Bodies: Initial Experience with an Interpedicular Approach
    Qing-Hua Tian, He-Fei Liu, Tao Wang, Ying-Sheng Cheng, Chun-Gen Wu
    Korean Journal of Radiology 2019 20 6

More in this TOC Section

  • Bern Score Validity for SIH
  • MP2RAGE 7T in MS Lesions of the Cervical Spine
  • Deep Learning for STIR Spine MRI Quality
Show more Spine

Similar Articles

Advertisement

Indexed Content

  • Current Issue
  • Accepted Manuscripts
  • Article Preview
  • Past Issues
  • Editorials
  • Editors Choice
  • Fellow Journal Club
  • Letters to the Editor

Cases

  • Case Collection
  • Archive - Case of the Week
  • Archive - Case of the Month
  • Archive - Classic Case

Special Collections

  • Special Collections

Resources

  • News and Updates
  • Turn around Times
  • Submit a Manuscript
  • Author Policies
  • Manuscript Submission Guidelines
  • Evidence-Based Medicine Level Guide
  • Publishing Checklists
  • Graphical Abstract Preparation
  • Imaging Protocol Submission
  • Submit a Case
  • Become a Reviewer/Academy of Reviewers
  • Get Peer Review Credit from Publons

Multimedia

  • AJNR Podcast
  • AJNR SCANtastic
  • Video Articles

About Us

  • About AJNR
  • Editorial Board
  • Not an AJNR Subscriber? Join Now
  • Alerts
  • Feedback
  • Advertise with us
  • Librarian Resources
  • Permissions
  • Terms and Conditions

American Society of Neuroradiology

  • Not an ASNR Member? Join Now

© 2025 by the American Society of Neuroradiology All rights, including for text and data mining, AI training, and similar technologies, are reserved.
Print ISSN: 0195-6108 Online ISSN: 1936-959X

Powered by HighWire