Prevalence of the high-riding vertebral artery depends on how it is defined: a meta-analysis with implications for C2 screw fixation.

IF 1.7 4区 医学 Q3 ANATOMY & MORPHOLOGY
Răzvan Costin Tudose, George Triantafyllou, Maria Piagkou, Mugurel Constantin Rusu
{"title":"Prevalence of the high-riding vertebral artery depends on how it is defined: a meta-analysis with implications for C2 screw fixation.","authors":"Răzvan Costin Tudose, George Triantafyllou, Maria Piagkou, Mugurel Constantin Rusu","doi":"10.1007/s12565-026-00954-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The high-riding vertebral artery (HRVA) is a common anatomical variant that increases the risk of vertebral artery injury during C2 screw placement for craniocervical fixation. The reported prevalence of HRVA has varied widely (4-65%), partly due to inconsistent definitions and mixed analytical units. The current study aimed to provide a definition-sensitive, hierarchically stratified pooled prevalence of HRVA. A systematic search of PubMed/MEDLINE, Web of Science, Scopus, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library (inception through March 2026) identified 687 records. After screening, 51 full-text articles were reviewed, and 21 studies (34 independent cohorts; 3972 patients, 6598 sides) met criteria for quantitative pooling. A hierarchical analytical framework was applied: a primary, strict analysis restricted to patient-level cohorts using the conventional Neo/Bloch definition (C2 isthmus height ≤ 5 mm and/or internal height ≤ 2 mm); an expanded patient-level analysis incorporating all HRVA definitions; and a separate standard-definition side/joint-level analysis. Prevalence was pooled using random-effects models with the Freeman-Tukey double-arcsine transformation, with logit-transformed and binomial-normal mixed-model analyses as sensitivity analyses. The strict patient-level pooled prevalence was 32.2% (95% CI: 23.5-41.5%; I² = 65.7%; k = 7). Restricting to non-pathological/general populations yielded 28.5% (95% CI: 25.3-31.8%; I² = 39.9%), while pathological/selected populations pooled to 40.0% (95% CI: 17.8-64.5%). The expanded patient-level analysis (k = 21) yielded 31.7% (95% CI: 24.4-39.4%; I² = 89.5%). Definition-stratified subgroup analysis revealed a nearly fourfold range in pooled prevalence (16.8% for axial-pedicle-only to 61.5% for isthmus-only definitions). The standard-definition side- or joint-level prevalence was 20.3% (95% CI: 12.4-29.5%; k = 12). Estimates were robust to the logit transformation and a mixed-effects model, and leave-one-out analysis across all 21 cohorts confirmed robustness (range: 29.4-33.1%). Approximately one in four general-population patients and two in five pathological-population patients harbour at least one HRVA. Prevalence estimates are highly sensitive to HRVA definition, population composition, and analytical unit. Preoperative CT evaluation of the vertebral artery course at C2 should be mandatory for all patients planned for craniocervical instrumentation. Future studies should adopt the standardised Neo/Bloch definition and report prevalence by morphometric subtype to enable meaningful cross-study comparison.</p>","PeriodicalId":7816,"journal":{"name":"Anatomical Science International","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2026-06-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Anatomical Science International","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s12565-026-00954-6","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ANATOMY & MORPHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The high-riding vertebral artery (HRVA) is a common anatomical variant that increases the risk of vertebral artery injury during C2 screw placement for craniocervical fixation. The reported prevalence of HRVA has varied widely (4-65%), partly due to inconsistent definitions and mixed analytical units. The current study aimed to provide a definition-sensitive, hierarchically stratified pooled prevalence of HRVA. A systematic search of PubMed/MEDLINE, Web of Science, Scopus, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library (inception through March 2026) identified 687 records. After screening, 51 full-text articles were reviewed, and 21 studies (34 independent cohorts; 3972 patients, 6598 sides) met criteria for quantitative pooling. A hierarchical analytical framework was applied: a primary, strict analysis restricted to patient-level cohorts using the conventional Neo/Bloch definition (C2 isthmus height ≤ 5 mm and/or internal height ≤ 2 mm); an expanded patient-level analysis incorporating all HRVA definitions; and a separate standard-definition side/joint-level analysis. Prevalence was pooled using random-effects models with the Freeman-Tukey double-arcsine transformation, with logit-transformed and binomial-normal mixed-model analyses as sensitivity analyses. The strict patient-level pooled prevalence was 32.2% (95% CI: 23.5-41.5%; I² = 65.7%; k = 7). Restricting to non-pathological/general populations yielded 28.5% (95% CI: 25.3-31.8%; I² = 39.9%), while pathological/selected populations pooled to 40.0% (95% CI: 17.8-64.5%). The expanded patient-level analysis (k = 21) yielded 31.7% (95% CI: 24.4-39.4%; I² = 89.5%). Definition-stratified subgroup analysis revealed a nearly fourfold range in pooled prevalence (16.8% for axial-pedicle-only to 61.5% for isthmus-only definitions). The standard-definition side- or joint-level prevalence was 20.3% (95% CI: 12.4-29.5%; k = 12). Estimates were robust to the logit transformation and a mixed-effects model, and leave-one-out analysis across all 21 cohorts confirmed robustness (range: 29.4-33.1%). Approximately one in four general-population patients and two in five pathological-population patients harbour at least one HRVA. Prevalence estimates are highly sensitive to HRVA definition, population composition, and analytical unit. Preoperative CT evaluation of the vertebral artery course at C2 should be mandatory for all patients planned for craniocervical instrumentation. Future studies should adopt the standardised Neo/Bloch definition and report prevalence by morphometric subtype to enable meaningful cross-study comparison.

高位椎动脉的流行取决于如何定义:一项对C2螺钉固定影响的荟萃分析。
高位椎动脉(HRVA)是一种常见的解剖变异,在放置C2螺钉进行颅颈固定时增加椎动脉损伤的风险。报告的HRVA患病率差异很大(4-65%),部分原因是定义不一致和分析单位混合。目前的研究旨在提供一个定义敏感的、分层的HRVA患病率汇总。通过对PubMed/MEDLINE、Web of Science、Scopus、EMBASE和Cochrane图书馆(成立至2026年3月)的系统搜索,确定了687条记录。筛选后,51篇全文文章被回顾,21项研究(34个独立队列;3972名患者,6598个侧)符合定量合并标准。采用分层分析框架:采用传统的Neo/Bloch定义(C2峡部高度≤5mm和/或内部高度≤2mm),对患者级队列进行初步严格分析;纳入所有HRVA定义的扩展患者层面分析;以及单独的标准定义侧/关节级分析。采用Freeman-Tukey双反正弦变换的随机效应模型对患病率进行汇总,采用对数变换和二项正态混合模型分析作为敏感性分析。严格患者水平总患病率为32.2% (95% CI: 23.5-41.5%; I²= 65.7%;k = 7)。限制在非病理/一般人群的结果为28.5% (95% CI: 25.3-31.8%; I²= 39.9%),而病理/选择人群的结果为40.0% (95% CI: 17.8-64.5%)。扩展的患者水平分析(k = 21)的结果为31.7% (95% CI: 24.4-39.4%; I²= 89.5%)。定义分层亚组分析显示,合并患病率的范围接近4倍(仅轴椎弓根定义为16.8%,仅峡部定义为61.5%)。标准定义的侧或关节水平患病率为20.3% (95% CI: 12.4-29.5%; k = 12)。对logit转换和混合效应模型的估计是稳健的,对所有21个队列的留一分析证实了稳健性(范围:29.4-33.1%)。大约四分之一的普通人群患者和五分之二的病理人群患者至少有一种HRVA。患病率估计对HRVA定义、人口构成和分析单位高度敏感。对于所有计划进行颅颈内固定的患者,必须在术前对C2椎动脉进行CT评估。未来的研究应采用标准化的Neo/Bloch定义,并按形态计量学亚型报告患病率,以便进行有意义的交叉研究比较。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Anatomical Science International
Anatomical Science International 医学-解剖学与形态学
CiteScore
2.80
自引率
8.30%
发文量
50
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: The official English journal of the Japanese Association of Anatomists, Anatomical Science International (formerly titled Kaibogaku Zasshi) publishes original research articles dealing with morphological sciences. Coverage in the journal includes molecular, cellular, histological and gross anatomical studies on humans and on normal and experimental animals, as well as functional morphological, biochemical, physiological and behavioral studies if they include morphological analysis.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书