ANALISIS MORFOMETRI TIGA DIMENSI SAKRUM MENGGUNAKAN CT-SCAN PADA POPULASI INDONESIA: IMPLIKASI TERHADAP PEMASANGAN PEDICLE SCREW SAKRUM DAN SACROILIAC SCREW
Keywords:
sacrum, morphometry, computed tomography, pedicle screw, sacroiliac screw, safe zoneAbstract
Background: Accurate anatomical knowledge of the sacrum is essential for safe sacral and sacroiliac screw instrumentation. Sacral morphometry and safe zones are known to vary across populations, yet population-specific data for Indonesians remain limited. This study aimed to evaluate three-dimensional sacral morphometry and determine clinically relevant safe zones in the Indonesian population.
Methods: A cross-sectional CT-based morphometric study was conducted on 98 healthy Indonesian adults aged 20–40 years. Key parameters related to surgical instrumentation were measured, including pedicle depth (PD), posterior pedicle height (PPH), pedicle width (PW), spinal canal dimensions, auricular surface dimensions, medial angulation, and area of the safe zone (AS). Comparisons between sexes were analyzed statistically.
Results: Most sacral dimensions were larger in men than in women, with significant differences observed in pedicle depth, posterior pedicle height, vertebral body dimensions, and auricular surface measurements (p < 0.05). The mean area of the safe zone did not differ significantly between sexes. The estimated safe sacroiliac screw length was 9.09 ± 0.42 cm in men and 8.89 ± 0.42 cm in women, while the recommended S1 pedicle screw depth was 3.33 ± 0.27 cm in men and 3.00 ± 0.35 cm in women, with a medial angulation of 30°–43°.
Conclusion: Sacral morphometry in the Indonesian population differs from that reported in other populations. These findings provide population-specific anatomical guidance that may improve the safety and accuracy of sacral and sacroiliac screw placement in clinical practice.
References
1. Nastoulis E, Karakasi MV, Pavlidis P, Thomaidis V, Fiska A. Anatomy and clinical significance of sacral variations: a systematic review. Folia Morphol. 2019 Dec 4;78(4):651–67.
2. Dayananda R, Pradhan P, Chander JK, Kumar MV. Sexual dimorphism in sacrum. J Indian Acad Forensic Med. 2020;42(3):161–3.
3. Shi D, Wang F, Wang D, Li X, Wang Q. 3-D finite element analysis of the influence of synovial condition in sacroiliac joint on the load transmission in human pelvic system. Med Eng Phys. 2014 June;36(6):745–53.
4. Siddiqui AU, Gurudiwan R, Siddiqui AT, Gupta P, Singh J. Putative Clinical Implications of Unilateral Ossified Sacrospinous Ligament. J Health Allied Sci NU. 2020 Dec;10(03):135–7.
5. Hirabayashi S, Kumano K, Kuroki T. Cotrel-Dubousset Pedicle Screw System for Various Spinal Disorders Merits and Problems: Spine. 1991 Nov;16(11):1298–304.
6. Saarenpää I, Laine T, Hirvonen J, Hurme S, Kotilainen E, Rinne J, et al. Accuracy of 837 pedicle screw positions in degenerative lumbar spine with conventional open surgery
This is an open access article under CC-BY-SA license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/ )|31 - 32
Berkala Kesehatan Klinik, Vol. 19, No. 1, 2025: 21-32
evaluated by computed tomography. Acta Neurochir (Wien). 2017 Oct;159(10):2011–7.
7. Weinstein JN, Rydevik BL, Rauschning W. Anatomic and Technical Considerations of Pedicle Screw Fixation: Clin Orthop. 1992 Nov;284:34???46.
8. Triwidodo A, Yulisa ND, P J, elaki, Dilogo IH, Rahyussalim AJ, et al. Evaluation of lower lumbar morphometry in Asian population: A computed tomography scans study. Imaging Med. 2021 Aug 31;13(8):1–13.
9. Triwidodo A, Rahyussalim AJ, Yulisa ND, Pandelaki J, Huraiby LS, Hadi IAN, et al. Sacrum morphometry and spinopelvic parameters among the Indonesian population using computed tomography scans. Medicine (Baltimore). 2021 Nov 24;100(47):e27955.
10. Xu R, Ebraheim NA, Yeasting RA, Wong FY, Jackson WT. Morphometric Evaluation of the First Sacral Vertebra and the Projection of Its Pedicle on the Posterior Aspect of the Sacrum: Spine. 1995 Apr;20(8):936–9.
11. Başaloğlu H, Turgut M, Taşer FA, Ceylan T, Başaloğlu HK, Ceylan AA. Morphometry of the sacrum for clinical use. Surg Radiol Anat. 2005 Dec;27(6):467–71.
12. Banik S, Mohakud S, Sahoo S, Tripathy PR, Sidhu S, Gaikwad MR. Comparative Morphometry of the Sacrum and Its Clinical Implications: A Retrospective Study of Osteometry in Dry Bones and CT Scan Images in Patients Presenting With Lumbosacral Pathologies. Cureus. 14(2):e22306.
13. Asher MA, Strippgen WE. Anthropometric studies of the human sacrum relating to dorsal transsacral implant designs. Clin Orthop. 1986 Feb;(203):58–62.
