ArticleCureus2021
Morphological Features of the Coccyx in the Turkish Population and Interrelationships Among the Parameters: A Computerized Tomography-Based Analysis.
Article in Cureus, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Predictors of outcomes of conservative management in chronic coccydynia - Results from a prospective clinicoradiological observational study.Journal of orthopaedics · 2025Article
- Morphologic evaluation of the coccyx in the pediatric population.Surgical and radiologic anatomy : SRA · 2025Article
- Imaging study of adult coccygeal morphology using direct digital radiography technology in China.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- The overlooked symptom of coccydynia: evaluation of sacrococcygeal morphologic and morphometric findings.Radiologie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction The coccyx is well-known to be a highly variable structure considering its morphology. To our knowledge, the relationship between the coccygeal types and other morphological features has not been studied yet. In addition to the interrelations among morphological parameters, this study investigated the morphology and morphometry of coccyx more extensively in the adult Turkish population using computerized tomography images. Methods Five hundred subjects who underwent pelvic computerized tomography were included in this study. In addition to coccyx type and the counts of coccygeal vertebrae and segments, the presence of coccygeal deviation, sacrococcygeal joint (SCJ) fusion, SCJ subluxation, intercoccygeal joint (ICJ) fusion, and coccygeal spicule were evaluated. The coccygeal length, sacrococcygeal angle, and intercoccygeal angle were measured on the digital workstation. The findings were subjected to statistical analyses. Results The coccygeal vertebra count ranged between three to five, with an average of 4.04 ± 0.48. The range of coccygeal segment count was between one and five, with an average of 2.53 ± 1.02. ICJ fusion in any segment, SCJ fusion, and SCJ subluxation were identified in 397 subjects (79.4%), 343 subjects (68.6%), and 17 subjects (3.4%), respectively. The coccyx types from the most common to the least common were as follows: type 2, type 1, type 3, type 4, and type 5. Coccygeal deviation to the left side was observed in 71 subjects (14.2%), while coccygeal deviation to the right side was observed in 61 subjects (12.2%). A coccygeal spicule was identified in 73 subjects (14.6%). The subjects' mean age demonstrated no significant difference considering the ICJ fusion (p=0.271), SCJ subluxation (p=0.51), coccygeal spicule (p=0.337), features of coccygeal deviation (p=0.83), and coccyx types (p=0.11). The subjects with SCJ fusion (50.7 ± 18.3 years) were significantly older than the subjects without SCJ fusion (46.5 ± 18.5 years) (p=0.016). The differences between the coccyx types considering the rate of SCJ fusion (p=0.002), ICJ fusion (p=0.04), and spicule presence (p<0.001) as well as the coccygeal vertebra count (p<0.001) were significant. Conclusion The presence of coccygeal spicule, a risk factor for coccydynia, is reported to be 14.6% in this study group that represents the Turkish population. This study indicates an association between the coccyx types and the frequency of SCJ fusion, ICJ fusion, and spicule presence and consequently suggests the significance of the coccyx type among the morphological features to cause susceptibility to coccydynia. Due to the multiplicity of the pain generators in the coccygeal region that is established by previous reports, the comparisons of different human populations and the knowledge on the interrelations between the morphologic parameters might facilitate the comprehension of the etiology of coccydynia. The clarification of interrelationship existence among the coccygeal morphological parameters requires further investigations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.