Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Psoas proximal insertion as a simple and reliable landmark for numbering lumbar vertebrae on MRI of the lumbar spine

  • Musculoskeletal
  • Published:
European Radiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objective

To evaluate the value of psoas muscle proximal insertion for correct numbering of the lumbar vertebrae in MRI, in particular in case of lumbosacral transitional vertebra (LSTV).

Methods

Two radiologists assessed 477 MRI scans of the lumbar spine with a sagittal localizer sequence on the whole spine for numbering vertebrae caudally from C2. Proximal insertion of the psoas was determined as the most proximal vertebra with psoas over half of its body on coronal T2 STIR sequence. The last lumbar vertebra was named considering both its number and the presence or absence of LSTV according to Castellvi classification. These same parameters were also assessed on 207 PET-CT scans of another cohort including the whole spine.

Results

Proximal insertion of the psoas was L1 in 94.1% of cases: 98.5% in case of modal anatomy, 81.4% in case of LSTV, and 51.7% in case of missing or supernumerary lumbar vertebra without LSTV. There was no statistically significant difference between MRI and CT data. The inter-reader agreement for determination of psoas proximal insertion was excellent (kappa = 0.96).

Conclusion

Proximal insertion of the psoas muscle is a helpful marker for correct numbering of the lumbar vertebrae in MRI and to detect a complete lumbosacral segmentation anomaly.

Key Points

• Proximal insertion of the psoas muscle can be easily identified on a coronal T2 STIR sequence.

• Psoas proximal insertion on the spine almost always designates the first lumbar vertebra and is helpful to accurately number all lumbar vertebrae, especially in case of lumbosacral transitional vertebra.

• Conversely, when psoas muscle does not insert five lumbar bodies above the apparent lumbosacral joint, the probability of variation in the number of lumbar vertebrae is high.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

Abbreviations

HU:

Hounsfield units

LSTV:

Lumbosacral transitional vertebra

MRI:

Magnetic resonance imaging

PACS:

Picture archiving and communication system

PET-CT:

Positron emission tomography-computed tomography

STIR:

Short tau inversion recovery

TE:

Echo time

TI:

Inversion time

TR:

Repetition time

References

  1. Malanga GA, Cooke PM (2004) Segmental anomaly leading to wrong level disc surgery in cauda equina syndrome. Pain Physician 7:107–110

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Konin GP, Walz DM (2010) Lumbosacral transitional vertebrae: classification, imaging findings, and clinical relevance. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 31:1778–1786

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Paik NC, Lim CS, Jang HS (2013) Numeric and morphological verification of lumbosacral segments in 8280 consecutive patients. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 38:E573–E578

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Castellvi AE, Goldstein LA, Chan DP (1984) Lumbosacral transitional vertebrae and their relationship with lumbar extradural defects. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 9:493–495

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Apazidis A, Ricart PA, Diefenbach CM, Spivak JM (2011) The prevalence of transitional vertebrae in the lumbar spine. Spine J 11:858–862

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Hughes RJ, Saifuddin A (2004) Imaging of lumbosacral transitional vertebrae. Clin Radiol 59:984–991

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Paik NC, Lim CS, Jang HS (2012) Numbering of vertebrae on MRI using a PACS cross-referencing tool. Acta Radiol 53:785–789

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Akbar JJ, Weiss KL, Saafir MA, Weiss JL (2010) Rapid MRI detection of vertebral numeric variation. AJR Am J Roentgenol 195:465–466

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Lee CH, Seo BK, Choi YC et al (2005) Using MRI to evaluate anatomic significance of aortic bifurcation, right renal artery, and conus medullaris when locating lumbar vertebral segments. AJR Am J Roentgenol 182:1295–1300

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Tokgoz N, Ucar M, Erdogan AB, Kilic K, Ozcan C (2014) Are spinal or paraspinal anatomic markers helpful for vertebral numbering and diagnosing lumbosacral transitional vertebrae? Korean J Radiol 15:258–266

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Farshad-Amacker NA, Aichmair A, Herzog RJ, Farshad M (2015) Merits of different anatomical landmarks for correct numbering of the lumbar vertebrae in lumbosacral transitional anomalies. Eur Spine J 24:600–608

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Carrino JA, Campbell PD Jr, Lin DC et al (2011) Effect of spinal segment variants on numbering vertebral levels at lumbar MR imaging. Radiology 259:196–202

  13. Nakajima A, Usui A, Hosokai Y et al (2014) The prevalence of morphological changes in the thoracolumbar spine on whole-spine computed tomographic images. Insights Imaging 5:77–83

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Farshad-Amacker NA, Lurie B, Herzog RJ, Farshad M (2014) Is the iliolumbar ligament a reliable identifier of the L5 vertebra in lumbosacral transitional anomalies? Eur Radiol 24:2623–2630

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. O’Driscoll CM, Irwin A, Saifuddin A (1996) Variations in morphology of the lumbosacral junction on sagittal MRI: correlation with plain radiography. Skeletal Radiol 25:225–230

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Wigh RE (1980) The thoracolumbar and lumbosacral transitional junctions. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 5:215–222

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Kershenovich A, Macias OM, Syed F, Davenport C, Moore GJ, Lock JH (2016) Conus medullaris level in vertebral columns with lumbosacral transitional vertebra. Neurosurgery 78:62–70

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Lee CH, Seo BK, Choi YC et al (2004) Using MRI to evaluate anatomic significance of aortic bifurcation, right renal artery, and conus medullaris when locating lumbar vertebral segments. AJR Am J Roentgenol 182:1295–1300

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Lee CH, Park CM, Kim KA et al (2007) Identification and prediction of transitional vertebrae on imaging studies: anatomical significance of paraspinal structures. Clin Anat 20:905–914

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Hanson EH, Mishra RK, Chang DS et al (2010) Sagittal whole-spine magnetic resonance imaging in 750 consecutive outpatients: accurate determination of the number of lumbar vertebral bodies: clinical article. J Neurosurg Spine 12:47–55

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Farshad-Amacker NA, Lurie B, Herzog RJ, Farshad M (2014) Interreader and intermodality reliability of standard anteroposterior radiograph and magnetic resonance imaging in detection and classification of lumbosacral transitional vertebra. Spine J 14:1470–1475

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Hsieh CY, Vanderford JD, Moreau SR, Prong T (2000) Lumbosacral transitional segments: classification, prevalence, and effect on disk height. J Manipulative Physiol Ther 23:483–489

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Tertti MO, Salminen JJ, Paajanen HE, Terho PH, Kormano MJ (1991) Low-back pain and disk degeneration in children: a case-control MR imaging study. Radiology 180:503–507

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Gray H (1918) Anatomy of the human body. Lea and Febiger, Philadelphia

    Book  Google Scholar 

  25. Le Double AF (1897) Treaty about variations of the human muscular system [in French]. Schleicher Frères, Paris

    Google Scholar 

  26. Laporte C, Albert JD, Duvauferrier R, Bertaud V, Gouillou M, Guillin R (2014) MRI investigation of radiating pain in the lower limbs: value of an additional sequence dedicated to the lumbosacral plexus and pelvic girdle. AJR Am J Roentgenol 203:1280–1285

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Tureli D, Ekinci G, Baltacioglu F (2014) Is any landmark reliable in vertebral enumeration? A study of 3.0-Tesla lumbar MRI comparing skeletal, neural, and vascular markers. Clin Imaging 38:792–796

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors thank Philippe Bruyant for his help with manuscript revision.

Funding

The authors state that this work has not received any funding.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Radiology, Military Teaching Hospital Clermont-Tonnerre, Rue du colonel Fonferrier, 29240, Brest Cedex 9, France

    François Ropars, J. Rousset & M. Garetier

  2. Department of Radiology, University Hospital La Cavale Blanche, Brest, France

    J. Mesrar & J. Ognard

  3. Department of Nuclear Medicine, University Hospital Morvan, Brest, France

    S. Querellou

Authors
  1. François Ropars
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. J. Mesrar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. J. Ognard
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. S. Querellou
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. J. Rousset
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. M. Garetier
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to François Ropars.

Ethics declarations

Guarantor

The scientific guarantor of this publication is Dr. Garetier Marc.

Conflict of interest

The authors of this manuscript declare no relationships with any companies, whose products or services may be related to the subject matter of the article.

Statistics and biometry

One of the authors has significant statistical expertise.

Informed consent

Written informed consent was obtained from all subjects in this study.

Ethical approval

Institutional Review Board approval was obtained.

Methodology

• Prospective and retrospective

• Observational

• Performed at one institution

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ropars, F., Mesrar, J., Ognard, J. et al. Psoas proximal insertion as a simple and reliable landmark for numbering lumbar vertebrae on MRI of the lumbar spine. Eur Radiol 29, 2608–2615 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-018-5798-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-018-5798-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation