There has been increasing recognition of the “chain of correlations” extending from the pelvic alignment to the spine [5] and that PI is a standard measurement for the surgical treatment of patients with ASD. Various formulas related to PI have been proposed for the surgical treatment of ASD to date [15, 16]. For instance, Schwab et al. [17] suggested a simple formula (LL = PI + 9 [±9]) to estimate the mean lumbar lordosis from the mean PI. Accurate PI measurement is thus a prerequisite for spine surgeons in the treatment of patients with ASD.
PI and pelvic rotation
PI is generally measured as the angle between the perpendicular line from the sacral plate and the line connecting the midpoint of the sacral plate to the midpoint of the bicoxofemoral axis on 2D sagittal radiographs of standing whole-spine lateral radiographs [7]. However, a 3D image of the pelvis from 2D radiographs can be influenced by pelvic position and orientation [12], for which there is a difficulty in precisely identifying the sacral endplate and bicoxofemoral axis [18]. In addition, radiological measurements, including PI measurement, may be influenced by the surgeon’s knowledge and consequent experience related to the anatomical landmarks [6].
In clinical practice, malposition or malorientation of the pelvis is commonly observed using standing whole-spine lateral radiographs because of factors such as the patient’s incorrect standing position, pelvic obliquity due to leg length discrepancy, and divergent X-ray beam, which could cause an error in the measurement of spinopelvic parameters [19, 20]. Thus, in 1998, Jackson et al. [19] highlighted the need for an accurate imaging technique for the pelvis to achieve more precise radiological measurements, including those of PI. They proposed geometrical rules to show that all radiographs presented 15° or less vertical pelvic rotation with simultaneous 20° or less tilt on the horizontal plane.
Tyrakowski et al. [12], using a single radiological phantom, defined 0° rotation as the complete superposition of the femoral heads in the anteroposterior direction on lateral radiographs and produced radiographs through rotation at 5° intervals up to 45° along the vertical axis. As a result, PI was shown to vary according to the pelvic position on the axial plane. The proper maximal angle of pelvic rotation for a reliable PI measurement on lateral radiographs was reported to be 30°. They also reported 2 years later in a study on PI measurements based on horizontal pelvic rotation that PI may be influenced by pelvic rotation on the coronal plane upon radiography and that a substantial error of PI measurements may occur upon 20° or more horizontal rotation [20]. In our study, similar results were obtained in that PI of an acceptable error of 6° on radiographs [12, 13] was 35° in horizontal pelvic rotation and 30° in vertical pelvic rotation.
This study agrees with the two previous studies by Tyrakowski et al. [12, 20] in that the changes in PI according to the horizontal or vertical rotation of the pelvis were analyzed. However, the key difference lies in the PI measurement method. Although the conventional measurements were based on simple radiological scans, as in the studies by Tyrakowski et al. [12, 20], the measured values cannot be accurately reproduced by repeated measurements with a constant probability of both intra- and inter-rater errors. In the present study, on the contrary, a higher reliability of result values could be achieved using CT scans and conducting 3D measurements using a 3D model based on several specialized programs, including AutoCAD. Another notable difference from the studies by Tyrakowski et al. [12, 20], where a single radiological phantom was used, is that the measurements in this study were taken from 30 patients. Through such highly reliable of patients, we revealed that PI measurements could be influenced by the horizontal and vertical rotation (0°, 5°, 10°, 15°, 20°, 25°, 30°, 35°, and 40°) of the pelvis while acquiring the radiograph.
Optimal PI evaluation
For an ideal assessment of pelvic parameters, including PI, it is crucial to acquire radiographs that allow precise identification of the sacral endplate in a straight line with two overlapping femoral heads [6]. Despite this, spinopelvic parameters are usually measured on 36-in.-long cassette lateral radiographs of the spine, and the projection of whole-spine radiographs is centered on the 12th vertebra [18]. Therefore, obtaining the perfect superposition of the two femoral heads and precisely identifying the sacral endplate are usually impossible using whole-spine radiographs. In particular, the sacral endplate could show an overlap of the lumbar spine and pelvic bony structures on whole-spine radiographs. At the same time, the presence of a buttock or ilium shadow could interfere with the precise evaluation of the sacral endplate. The rotation of the pelvis could also deform the shape of the sacral endplate to oval on the radiograph [20].
Vrtovec et al. [11] reported that, for PI measurements, 2D radiographic images showed approximately 5° overestimation compared with 3D CT images and that the manual measurements through 2D cross-section could not reflect the precise center and inclination of the 3D anatomical structure. In addition, Yamada et al. [21] analyzed the reliability of measuring spinopelvic parameters, including PI, on standing whole-spine lateral radiographs and standing lateral pelvis radiographs. They also reported that PI also tends to be larger by approximately 5° due to a large projection angle to the sacral endplate on standing whole-spine lateral radiographs compared with that on standing lateral pelvic radiographs. Chen et al. [22] also reported that, as the vertical projection point is positioned higher than the spinopelvic area on whole-spine radiographs, the femoral heads failed to align and the sacral endplate could not be sharply defined. However, on pelvic radiographs, the vertical projection point of the radiograph tube was present in the spinopelvic area, such that the femoral heads were aligned and accurate identification of the sacral endplate was possible. The optimized radiographic intensity in the pelvic area contributes to more precise visualization of the femoral heads and sacral endplate through increased signals in the pelvic area. Thus, compared with whole-spine radiographs, standing pelvis radiographs would be more effective in analyzing spinopelvic parameters, including PI.
In treating patients with ASD, the measurement of the Cobb’s angle using whole-spine radiographs should be performed. However, greater emphasis is placed on standing lateral pelvic radiographs than whole-spine radiographs in evaluating spinopelvic parameters, including PI. To minimize measurement errors according to the horizontal and vertical rotation of the pelvis, the following methods are suggested for PI measurements: In producing the standing pelvic lateral radiographs, the pelvis should first be adjusted horizontally by placing the feet above a block in the case of pelvic obliquity on whole-spine radiographs. After checking the greater trochanter (GT) of the femur through palpation, the center points of the X-ray tube and cassette should be positioned approximately 3 cm above the GT at 150° to produce maximum overlapping of the two femoral heads such that they are positioned at the center of the produced images (true pelvis lateral radiograph, Fig. 7A). Even in the case of complete overlap of the two femoral heads, the first sacral endplate boundary may be unclear. In such cases, the proximal and distal boundaries of the upper endplate should be precisely identified in reference to the sagittal cut on CT or MRI of the sacral endplate, and the drawings can be made on the standing pelvic lateral radiographs (Fig. 7B). The subsequent PI measurement is anticipated to be more accurate based on the angle between the key line from the center of the sacral endplate and the line connecting the identified center of the sacral endplate and the center of the two femoral heads in maximum overlap (Fig. 7C).
Limitations
This study has some limitations. First, as the study was conducted retrospectively, several confounding variables may exist. Second, the PI measurements were taken using only the 3D model of special mechanical programs, including AutoCAD, to prevent direct comparison with 2D radiographs. In addition, only PI was studied, unlike in previous studies [12, 20, 23, 24] on PT and SS. Futhermore, influencing factors such as the original position or orientation of each patient during the CT scan were not considered in this study. Nevertheless, more precise PI measurements using the 3D model are believed to differentiate this study from previous studies. Third, in studies using 2D radiographs, there have been few cases of pelvic rotation of 30–35° or more as in our study, and our acceptable angle was relatively large compared to that of previous studies. The results of this study were measured by artificially rotating 3D reconstruction images of patients’ CT scans, so there may be limitations and differences with 2D radiographs; therefore, a future comparative study between 3D and 2D radiographs is necessary. Fourth, with the recent advancement of novel imaging techniques, including EOS imaging (Biospace Med, France), far more accurate angle measurements have become possible. However, considering that most clinics have not yet acquired the EOS, the method based on true pelvic lateral radiographs suggested in this study is anticipated to serve as a useful guideline for spine surgeons planning surgical treatments for ASD.