Skip to main content
Log in

A morphological study of lumbar vertebral endplates: radiographic, visual and digital measurements

  • Original Article
  • Published:
European Spine Journal Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

Clinical observations suggest that endplate shape and size are related to complications of disc arthroplasty surgery. Yet, the morphology of the vertebral endplate has not been well defined. This study was conducted to characterize the morphology of lumbar vertebral endplates and to quantify their morphometrics using radiographic, visual and digital measures.

Methods

A total of 591 vertebral endplates from 76 lumbosacral spines of men were studied (mean age 51.3 years). The shape of the vertebral endplates was classified as concave, flat and irregular, and was evaluated from both radiographs and cadaveric samples. Each endplate was further digitized using a laser scanner to quantify diameters, surface area and concavity for the whole endplate and its components (central endplate and epiphyseal rim). The morphological characteristics and morphometrics of the vertebral endplates were depicted.

Results

In both radiographic and visual assessments, more cranial endplates (relative to the disc) were concave and more caudal endplates were flat at all disc levels (p < 0.001). On average, the mean concavity depth was 1.5 mm for the cranial endplate and 0.7 mm for the caudal endplate. From L1/2 down to L5/S1 discs, the vertebral endplate gradually changed into a more oval shape. The central endplate was approximately 70 % of the diameter of the whole endplate and the width of the epiphyseal rim varied from 3 to 7 mm.

Conclusions

There is marked morphological asymmetry between the two adjacent endplates of a lumbar intervertebral disc: the cranial endplate is more concave than the caudal endplate. The size and shape of the vertebral endplate also vary considerably between the upper and lower lumbar regions.

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

Access this article

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Taylor JR (1975) Growth of human intervertebral discs and vertebral bodies. J Anat 120:49–68

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Moore K, Dalley A (2006) Clinically oriented anatomy. Lippincott Williams and Wilkins, Baltimore, pp 478–519

    Google Scholar 

  3. Moore RJ (2006) The vertebral endplate: disc degeneration, disc regeneration. Eur Spine J 15:S333–S337

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Eijkelkamp M (2002) Development of an artificial intervertebral disc. PhD thesis, University of Groningen

  5. Lakshmanan P, Dvorak V, Schratt W, Thambiraj S, Collins I, Boszczyk B (2010) Is there a difference in shape of the endplates in sagittal plane? A morphometric study of the lumbosacral spine (Abstract). Spine J 10:46s

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. van der Houwen EB, Baron P, Veldhuizen AG, Burgerhof JG, van Ooijen PM, Verkerke GJ (2010) Geometry of the intervertebral volume and vertebral endplates of the human spine. Ann Biomed Eng 38:33–40

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Guyer RD, Auer PB, Zigler JE, Blumenthal S, Ohnmeiss DD (2009) P1. Relationship between endplate morphology and clinical outcome of single-level lumbar disc arthroplasty. Spine J 9:114S

    Google Scholar 

  8. Dar G, Masharawi Y, Peleg S, Steinberg N, May H, Medlej B et al (2011) The epiphyseal ring: a long forgotten anatomical structure with significant physiological function. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 36:850–856

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Videman T, Nurminen M, Troup JD (1990) 1990 Volvo Award in clinical sciences. Lumbar spinal pathology in cadaveric material in relation to history of back pain, occupation, and physical loading. Spine 15:728–740

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Chan KK, Sartoris DJ, Haghighi P, Sledge P, Barrett-Connor E, Trudell DT et al (1997) Cupid’s bow contour of the vertebral body: evaluation of pathogenesis with bone densitometry and imaging–histopathologic correlation. Radiology 202:253–256

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Keating AP, Knox J, Bibb R, Zhurov AI (2008) A comparison of plaster, digital and reconstructed study model accuracy. J Orthod 35:191–201

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Spalding SJ, Kwoh CK, Boudreau R, Enama J, Lunich J, Huber D et al (2008) Three-dimensional and thermal surface imaging produces reliable measures of joint shape and temperature: a potential tool for quantifying arthritis. Arthritis Res Ther 10:R10

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Portney LG, Watkins MP (2007) Multiple comparison tests. In: Foundations of clinical research, applications to practice, Pearson Education Inc., New Jersey, pp 479–501

  14. Sribney B, StataCorp (1996) A comparison of different tests for trend. http://www.stata.com/support/faqs/stat/trendhtml

  15. Landis JR, Koch GG (1977) The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 33:159–174

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Hall LT, Esses SI, Noble PC, Kamaric E (1998) Morphology of the lumbar vertebral endplates. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 23:1517–1522

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Langrana NA, Kale SP, Edwards WT, Lee CK, Kopacz KJ (2006) Measurement and analyses of the effects of adjacent end plate curvatures on vertebral stresses. Spine J 6:267–278

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Aharinejad S, Bertagnoli R, Wicke K, Firbas W, Schneider B (1990) Morphometric analysis of vertebrae and intervertebral discs as a basis of disc replacement. Am J Anat 189:69–76

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Berry JL, Moran JM, Berg WS, Steffee AD (1987) A morphometric study of human lumbar and selected thoracic vertebrae. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 12:362–367

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Panjabi MM, Goel V, Oxland T, Takata K, Duranceau J, Krag M et al (1992) Human lumbar vertebrae. Quantitative three-dimensional anatomy. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 17:299–306

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Harrington J Jr, Sungarian A, Rogg J, Makker VJ, Epstein MH (2001) The relation between vertebral endplate shape and lumbar disc herniations. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 26:2133–2138

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Pappou IP, Cammisa FP Jr, Girardi FP (2007) Correlation of end plate shape on MRI and disc degeneration in surgically treated patients with degenerative disc disease and herniated nucleus pulposus. Spine J 7:32–38

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Wang Y, Battie MC, Boyd SK, Videman T (2011) The osseous endplates in lumbar vertebrae: thickness, bone mineral density and their associations with age and disk degeneration. Bone 48:804–809

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Murtagh RD, Quencer RM, Cohen DS, Yue JJ, Sklar EL (2009) Normal and abnormal imaging findings in lumbar total disk replacement: devices and complications. Radiographics 29:105–118

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Punt IM, Visser VM, van Rhijn LW, Kurtz SM, Antonis J, Schurink GW et al (2008) Complications and reoperations of the SB Charite lumbar disc prosthesis: experience in 75 patients. Eur Spine J 17:36–43

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. van Ooij A, Oner FC, Verbout AJ (2003) Complications of artificial disc replacement: a report of 27 patients with the SB Charite disc. J Spinal Disord Tech 16:369–383

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Auerbach JD, Ballester CM, Hammond F, Carine ET, Balderston RA, Elliott DM (2010) The effect of implant size and device keel on vertebral compression properties in lumbar total disc replacement. Spine J 10:333–340

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We thank Darrell Goertzen, Jesse Huard and Kevin Ye for assisting with the acquisition of the quantitative morphometric measurements. Y.W. was supported by Alberta Innovates-Health Solutions (AIHS) and the China Scholarship Council (CSC). M.C.B. was supported by the Canada Research Chairs Program.

Conflict of interest

None.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tapio Videman.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Wang, Y., Battié, M.C. & Videman, T. A morphological study of lumbar vertebral endplates: radiographic, visual and digital measurements. Eur Spine J 21, 2316–2323 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-012-2415-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-012-2415-8

Keywords

Navigation