Influence of Size and Shape of the Auricular Surfaces on Subchondral Bone Density Distribution in the Sacroiliac Joint

Poilliot, Amélie; Hammer, Niels; Toranelli, Mireille; Doyle, Terence; Gay, Max Hans-Peter; Müller‐Gerbl, Magdalena

doi:10.2139/ssrn.4142058

Cited by 2 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In fact, it was shown that larger joints re ected higher mineralisation patterns than smaller joints only on the iliac side. It was hypothesised that this may be due to cartilage thinning on the iliac side which may account for a mineralisation 'compensation mechanism' for the loss of chondral tissue [23]. In this study, it was found that mean mineralisation in the painful joint cohort was higher in females/ small joints on the sacral side when compared to the controls.…”

Section: Painful Joints Re Ect Variable Mineralisation Patterns Compa...mentioning

confidence: 65%

Auricular surface morphology and surface area does not influence subchondral bone density distribution in the dysfunctional sacroiliac joint

Poilliot

Hammer

Toranelli

et al. 2022

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: The subchondral lamella of the sacroiliac joint (SIJ) auricular surface is morphologically inconsistent, varying inter-individually and side-dependently. These variations have been well documented, however, the morpho-mechanical relationship to sacroiliac joint dysfunction (SIJD) remains unstudied to date. Here, the bone mineralisation density of the iliac and sacral auricular surface subchondral endplate is compared between morphological subtypes, as well as in large and small surfaces, in a cohort comprising SIJD joints and controls.Methods: Computed tomography (CT) datasets from 29 patients with bilateral or unilateral SIJD were subjected to CT osteoabsorptiometry. Sacral and iliac surface areas and posterior angles were calculated and surfaces were classified into small (<15 cm3) and large (≥15 cm3) joints and morphological types 1 (>160°), 2 (130-160°) and 3 (<130°), respectively. Mineralisation patterns were classified into four patterns, two marginal (M1 and M2) and two non-marginal (N1 and N2). Each sacral and iliac surface was subsequently classified into one of these mineralisation groups. Results: The surface area of all joints in the cohort averaged 15.0±2.4 cm2 (males 16.2±2.5 cm2, females 13.7±1.6 cm2). No age correlations with surface area were found nor differences in mean HU values when comparing sizes, sexes or morphology type when looking at painful joints (unilateral or bilateral) and contralateral non-painful joints. Comparisons of controls with the SIJD cohort revealed significant differences in female sacra (p=0.02) and small sacra (p=0.03). There was low conformity in marginal and non-marginal patterns, 26% for contralateral non-painful joints, and 46% conformity in painful joints. The majority of dysfunctional joints was of type 2 morphology (59%), equally distributed between small (49%) and large joints (51%). Larger joints had the highest frequency of painful joints (72%). Regarding the prominence of sub-patterns, M1C was more prominent in painful joints. Conclusions: Load distribution related to difference in auricular surface morphology seems to have little impact on pain-related subchondral bone adaptation in cases of SIJD. Larger joints may be predisposed to the onset of pain due to the weakening of the extracapsular structures. Pain-affected joints reflect common conformity patterns of sacral apex mineralisation with corresponding superior corner iliac mineralisation.

show abstract

Section: Painful Joints Re Ect Variable Mineralisation Patterns Compa...mentioning

confidence: 65%

Auricular surface morphology and surface area does not influence subchondral bone density distribution in the dysfunctional sacroiliac joint

Poilliot

Hammer

Toranelli

et al. 2022

Preprint

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…As previously described in A Poilliot, N Hammer, M Toranelli, T Doyle, M Gay and M Müller-Gerbl [23], patterns were identi ed belonging to two main groups: the marginal (M) and non-marginal groups (N). This assessment was made based on a semi-quantitative analysis of the entire surface region colourmap of each joint surface.…”

Section: Pattern Classi Cation Methodologymentioning

confidence: 87%

“…1). In addition, data corresponding to a group of control specimens (with no SIJ-related pain or pathology), used previously [23] were used for the nal comparison of this study comparing the SIJD patients with the controls. This cohort was made up or body donors and patient CT scans (Fig.…”

Section: Specimensmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Conventional clinical CT (SOMATOM as64 open, Siemens, Munich, Germany) data sets from patients were deployed as in previous studies [23,24]. Slice thickness was 0.6 mm.…”

Section: Ct Osteoabsorptiometry (Ct-oam)mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The tree morphologies were as follows: T1 has a wide posterior angle (> 160°), T3 narrow posterior angle (< 130°) and T2 is in between (130-160°). The process involved making two lines through the centre of each limb and a third through the cross over point of the rst two lines and the 'centre' of the angle at the posterior border [23]. The mean angle between the two limbs was then measured via the three points (Fig.…”

Section: Classi Cation Into Morphology Typesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Auricular surface morphology and surface area does not influence subchondral bone density distribution in the dysfunctional sacroiliac joint

et al. 2022

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: The subchondral lamella of the sacroiliac joint (SIJ) auricular surface is morphologically inconsistent, varying inter-individually and side-dependently. These variations have been well documented, however, the morpho-mechanical relationship to sacroiliac joint dysfunction (SIJD) remains unstudied to date. Here, the bone mineralisation density of the iliac and sacral auricular surface subchondral endplate is compared between morphological subtypes, as well as in large and small surfaces, in a cohort comprising SIJD joints and controls.Methods: Computed tomography (CT) datasets from 29 patients with bilateral or unilateral SIJD were subjected to CT osteoabsorptiometry. Sacral and iliac surface areas and posterior angles were calculated and surfaces were classi ed into small (<15 cm 3 ) and large (≥15 cm 3 ) joints and morphological types 1 (>160°), 2 (130-160°) and 3 (<130°), respectively. Mineralisation patterns were classi ed into four patterns, two marginal (M1 and M2) and two non-marginal (N1 and N2). Each sacral and iliac surface was subsequently classi ed into one of these mineralisation groups.Results: The surface area of all joints in the cohort averaged 15.0±2.4 cm 2 (males 16.2±2.5 cm 2 , females 13.7±1.6 cm 2 ). No age correlations with surface area were found nor differences in mean HU values when comparing sizes, sexes or morphology type when looking at painful joints (unilateral or bilateral) and contralateral non-painful joints. Comparisons of controls with the SIJD cohort revealed signi cant differences in female sacra (p=0.02) and small sacra (p=0.03). There was low conformity in marginal and non-marginal patterns, 26% for contralateral non-painful joints, and 46% conformity in painful joints.The majority of dysfunctional joints was of type 2 morphology (59%), equally distributed between small (49%) and large joints (51%). Larger joints had the highest frequency of painful joints (72%). Regarding the prominence of sub-patterns, M1C was more prominent in painful joints.Conclusions: Load distribution related to difference in auricular surface morphology seems to have little impact on pain-related subchondral bone adaptation in cases of SIJD. Larger joints may be predisposed to the onset of pain due to the weakening of the extracapsular structures. Pain-affected joints re ect common conformity patterns of sacral apex mineralisation with corresponding superior corner iliac mineralisation.

show abstract

Influence of Size and Shape of the Auricular Surfaces on Subchondral Bone Density Distribution in the Sacroiliac Joint

Cited by 2 publications

References 27 publications

Auricular surface morphology and surface area does not influence subchondral bone density distribution in the dysfunctional sacroiliac joint

Auricular surface morphology and surface area does not influence subchondral bone density distribution in the dysfunctional sacroiliac joint

Auricular surface morphology and surface area does not influence subchondral bone density distribution in the dysfunctional sacroiliac joint

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About