%0 Journal Article
%T Is Sacralization Really a Cause of Low Back Pain?
%A Mehmet Bulut
%A Bekir Yavuz U£¿ar
%A Demet U£¿ar
%A £¿brahim Azboy
%A Abdullah Demirta£¿
%A Celil Alemdar
%A Mehmet Gem
%A Emin £¿zkul
%J ISRN Orthopedics
%D 2013
%R 10.1155/2013/839013
%X 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. 1. Introduction Numerous causes have been attributed to low back pain (LBP). A long list exists, but the enlistment of sacralization as one of the causes has resulted in a lot of controversy. Sacralization is a congenital vertebral anomaly of the lumbosacral spine (fusion between L5 and the first sacral segment) [1]. This alteration may contribute to incorrect identification of a vertebral segment. Several studies have described the occurrence of this anomaly in a back pain population [2¨C7]. Some authors have stated that sacralization is incidentally diagnosed and has no clinical impact [7, 8], whereas others claim that this anomaly may predispose patients to certain clinical disorders [9¨C11]. This controversy has been quite intriguing and has been the stimulus for carrying out this present study. The intention was to examine in detail the incidence of this anomaly in the LBP population. Our study aimed to use the incidence of this congenital anomaly to establish a relationship between it and LBP. 2. Materials and Methods After institution review board approval for this prospective study, 500 lumbosacral radiographs of LBP patients and 500 radiographs of control group
%U http://www.hindawi.com/journals/isrn.orthopedics/2013/839013/