Type of Article:  Original

Volume 7; Issue 2.1 (April 2019)

Page No.: 6381-6386

DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.16965/ijar.2019.122


Suranjana Banik *1, Ajita Rajkumari 2.

*1 Post Graduate Trainee in MD Anatomy, Department of Anatomy, Regional Institute of Medical Sciences, Imphal, Manipur India.

2 Professor, Department of Anatomy, Regional Institute of Medical Sciences, Imphal, Manipur India.

Corresponding Author: Dr. Suranjana Banik, Regional Institute of Medical Sciences, Department of Anatomy, Lamphelpat, Imphal, Manipur-795004; Imphal, India. Mobile: +917005344990 E-Mail: suranjanabanik@gmail.com


Introduction: The lumbosacral spine is the region of transition from the appendicular to the axial skeleton. Accidents, degenerative conditions, congenital defects and neoplastic metastases often affect the lumbar region. Low back pain resulting from lumbar canal stenosis is one of the major complaints in young to adult population. Apart from that lumbar vertebrae morphometry is required in many surgical as well as anaesthetic procedures.

Aims and objectives: The present study was undertaken to determine the morphometry of human cadaveric lumbar vertebrae and to compare findings with other authors and forming a baseline data in relation to various lumbar canal pathologies that can be of help to the medical and surgical experts.

Materials and methods: Dried lumbar vertebrae were obtained from the Department of Anatomy of Regional Institute of Medical Sciences, Imphal, India. Vertebrae belonging to same set and without any external deformity were chosen and separated into typical and atypical ones.  Measurement of Midsaggital diameter, Interpedicular distance, and Anteroposterior diameter of lateral recess was done using digital vernier calliper.

Observations and Results: The study showed increase in all the diameters from L1 to L5 with a narrowing in all cases at L3 level. Therefore, L3 remains the transition point in all the measurements and thus one of the possible sites for nerve root compression due to canal stenosis, which is one of the major causes of low back pain.

Conclusion: The present data forms a baseline of adult lumbar vertebral morphology and is useful source of information to surgeons, physicians and anatomists. It is also helpful for the screw and implant manufacturers. Further study with sex and ethnic consideration can generate forensic and anthropological data.

KEY WORDS: Lumbar vertebrae, Lumbar canal stenosis, Morphometry, Midsaggital diameter, Interpedicular distance, Lateral recess diameter.


  1. C Chambliss H, Roman TR, Alan SH. Lumbar Microdissection. In The Spine: Master Techniques in Orthopaedic Surgery. Edited by Thomas A Zdeblick and Todd J Albert. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Philadelphia; 2014.
  2. Standring S (2016) Gray’s Anatomy: The Anatomical Basis of Clinical Practice. 41st ed. Elsevier:725-726.
  3. Kapoor Y, Anil RS, Krishnaiah M, Suseelamma D. Morphometry of the lumbar vertebrae and its clinical significance. Sch J App Med Sci 2014; 2(2):1045-1052.
  4. Jadhav AS, Katti AS, Herekar NG, Jadhav SB. Osteological study of lumbar vertebrae in Western Maharashtra population. Journal of the Anatomical Society of India 2013; 62(1):10-16.
  5. Varol T, Iyem C, Cezayirli E, Erturk M, Kayalioglu G, Hayretdag C. Comparative morphometry of the lower lumbar vertebrae: Osteometry in dry bones and computed tomography images of patients with and without low back pain. Journal of International Medical Research 2006; 34(3):316-330.
  6. Garfin SR, Rydevik BL, Lipson SJ. Spinal stenosis. In: Rothman Rh, Simeone FA(ed). The Spine. 3rd ed. Philadelphia: WB. Saunders;1992:791-856.
  7. Ciricillo SF, Weinstein PR. Lumbar spinal stenosis. West J Med 1993; 171-177.
  8. Ran B, Li Q, Yu B, Chen X, Guo K. Morphometry of lumbar spinous process via three dimensional CT reconstruction in a Chinese population. International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Medicine. 2015; 8(1):1129.
  9. Chawla K, Sharma M, Abhaya A. Kochhar S. Morphometry of the lumbar pedicle in West India. Eur J Anat 2011; 15(3):155- 161.
  10. Vinay KV, Beena DN, Vishal K. Lumbar pedicle morphometry in South Indians using CR-35X digitizer. Indian Journal of Fundamental and Applied Life Sciences 2012; 2(2):173-178.
  11. Gocmen MN, Karabekir H,  Ertekin T, Edizer M,  Canan Y, Izzet Duyar I . Evaluation of lumbar vertebral body and disc: a stereological morphometric study. Int. J. Morphol 2010; 28: 841-847.
  12. El Rakhawy M, Abd El Rahman ES, Ibrahim L, Ehab A. Lumbar vertebral canal stenosis: concept of morphometric and radiometric study of the human lumbar vertebral canal. International Journal of Experimental and Clinical Anatomy of the Human Lumbar Vertebral Canal 2010; 4: 51- 62.
  13. Atta Alla El SS, Saab IM, El Shishtawy M, Hassan KH. Morphometric study of the lumbosacral spine and some of its related angles in Lebanese adult females. Ital J Anat Embryol 2014; 119(2): 92-105.
  14. Kim HJ, Chung S, Kim S. Influences of trunk muscles on lumbar lordosis and sacral angles. Eur Spine J 2006; 15: 409-414.
  15. Storm PB, Chou D, Tamargo RJ. Lumbar spinal stenosis, cauda equina syndrome, and multiple lumbosacral radiculopathies. Phys Med Rehabil Clin N Am 2002; 13(3):713- 733.
  16. Bajwa NS, Toy JO, Ahn NU. Application of a correlation between the lumbar Torg ratio and the area of the spinal canal to predict lumbar stenosis: a study of 420 postmortem subjects. J Orthop Traumatol 2013; 14(3):207-212.
  17. Fraser JF, Huang RC, Girardi FP, Cammisa FP JR. Pathogenesis, presentation and treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis associated with coronal (or) sagittal spinal deformities. Neurosurg Focus 2003; 14(1):e6.
  18. Kamble YS, Kulkarni PR, Joshi UU. Morphometry and sexual dimorphism of lumbar pedicles in dry bones of Maharashtra region. Int J Anat Res 2017; (4.3):4654-4659
  19. Azu OO, Komolafe OA, Ofusori DA, Ajayi SA, Naidu ECS, Abiodun AA, Naidu E. Morphometric study of lumbar vertebrae in adult South African subjects.  J. Morphol 2016; 34(4):1345-1351.
  20. Amonoo-Kuofi H. Maximum and minimum lumbar interpedicular distances in normal adult Nigerians. Journal of Anatomy 1982; 135 (Pt 2): 225.
  21. Kayaoglu CR, Calikoğlu C, Binler S. Re-operation after lumbar disc surgery: results in 85 cases. Journal of International Medical Research 2003; 31(4):318-323.
  22. Aly T, Amin O. Geometrical dimensions and morphological study of the lumbar spinal canal in the normal Egyptian population. Orthopedics. 2013 Feb 1; 36(2):e229-34.
  23. Santiago F, Milena G, Herrera R, Romero P, Plazas P. Morphometry of the lower lumbar vertebrae in patients with and without low back pain. European Spine Journal 2001; 10(3): 228-233.
  24. Spector LR, Madigan L, Rhyne A, Darden B II, Kim D. Cauda Equina Syndrome. Journal of American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons 2008; 16(8): 471-479.

Cite this article: Suranjana Banik, Ajita Rajkumari. MORPHOMETRIC ANALYSIS OF LUMBAR VERTEBRAE AND ITS APPLIED CLINICAL IMPORTANCE. Int J Anat Res 2019;7(2.1):6381-6386. DOI: 10.16965/ijar.2019.122