↓ Skip to main content

The prevalence of congenital C1 arch anomalies

Overview of attention for article published in European Spine Journal, August 2017
Altmetric Badge

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
15 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The prevalence of congenital C1 arch anomalies
Published in
European Spine Journal, August 2017
DOI 10.1007/s00586-017-5283-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Gina Hyun, Emad Allam, Paul Sander, Christopher Hasiak, Yihua Zhou

Abstract

To determine the prevalence, radiographic features and reporting rate of, and the association between the congenital anterior and posterior C1 arch anomalies. The computed tomography (CT) images of the cervical spines of all patients over 18 years who had CT examinations in our hospital during the study period were reviewed to evaluate for congenital anomalies of the anterior and posterior C1 arches. Radiology reports of the corresponding CT examinations were reviewed to determine the reporting rate of these defects. Of 3273 subjects, 185 (5.65%) had congenital atlas anomalies: 169 isolated posterior (5.16%), 15 combined anterior and posterior (bipartite, 0.46%), and one isolated anterior (0.031%) arch defects. Females had a higher prevalence than males (7.46 versus 4.72%, P = 0.0013). Eighty-three cases (44.9%) of C1 arch anomalies were not reported. The Currarino type A, B, C and E posterior arch defects accounted for 81.6, 8.1, 1.1, and 0.5% of all arch anomalies while type D was not observed. Fifteen patients (0.46%) had combined anterior and posterior arch anomalies (bipartite atlas) versus only one with an isolated anterior C1 defect, indicating a significant association between the anterior and posterior arch defects (P < 0.0001). Although some types of congenital C1 arch anomalies are rare, type A defects are relatively common radiological findings that are unreported approximately 45% of the time. Based on the significant association between the anterior and posterior arch defects, we propose possible mechanisms for the formation of the bipartite atlas.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 15 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 15 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 3 20%
Student > Bachelor 2 13%
Other 2 13%
Student > Postgraduate 1 7%
Unknown 7 47%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 4 27%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 13%
Neuroscience 1 7%
Unknown 8 53%