Literature DB >> 21113592

Cervical spinal canal stenosis: the differences between stenosis at the lower cervical and multiple segment levels.

Yuichiro Morishita1, Masatoshi Naito, Jeffrey C Wang.   

Abstract

The lower cervical segments are commonly the level responsible for cervical spondylotic myelopathy; however, we rarely encounter stenosis at the upper cervical segment in a clinical setting. We assumed that there might be some differences between the pathogenetic mechanisms underlying the development of cervical canal stenosis at different segments. We performed positional MRI in the weight-bearing position for 295 consecutive symptomatic patients. All subjects were classified into four groups (A: normal; B: C3-4 stenosis; C: C5-6 stenosis; D: two-level cervical segments stenosis, stenosis at C3-4 and C5-6). Age, sagittal cervical canal diameter, cervical intervertebral disc degeneration, cervical cord compression, and cervical mobilities were evaluated for each group. Group B showed a narrow cervical spinal canal structure at the C3 to C4 pedicle levels, while groups C and D showed narrow structures at the C4 to C6 pedicle levels in the cervical spine. Additionally, the sagittal cervical canal diameters at all pedicle levels, except C7, in group D were significantly smaller than those observed in group C. We demonstrated the differences in the pathogenetic processes for the development of cervical spinal canal stenosis between C3-4, C5-6, and two-level cervical segments stenosis. Our results suggest that the developmental morphological structure of the cervical spinal canal plays an important role in the development of cervical canal stenosis at different segments. Moreover, individuals with sagittal cervical canal diameters of less than 13 mm may be exposed to an increased risk for future development of cervical spinal canal stenosis at the upper cervical segments following stenosis at the lower cervical segments.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 21113592      PMCID: PMC3174302          DOI: 10.1007/s00264-010-1169-3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int Orthop        ISSN: 0341-2695            Impact factor:   3.075


  14 in total

1.  DEGENERATIVE DISC DISEASE OF THE CERVICAL SPINE.

Authors:  Z B FRIEDENBERG; W T MILLER
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  1963-09       Impact factor: 5.284

2.  The cervical spine; an anatomico-pathological study of 70 specimens (using a special technique) with particular reference to the problem of cervical spondylosis.

Authors:  E E PAYNE; J D SPILLANE
Journal:  Brain       Date:  1957-12       Impact factor: 13.501

3.  The cervical spinal canal in intraspinal expansive processes.

Authors:  E BOIJSEN
Journal:  Acta radiol       Date:  1954-08       Impact factor: 1.990

4.  Cervical myelopathy caused by C3-C4 spondylosis in elderly patients: a radiographic analysis of pathogenesis.

Authors:  H Mihara; K Ohnari; M Hachiya; S Kondo; K Yamada
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2000-04-01       Impact factor: 3.468

5.  Roentgenographic findings in the cervical spine in asymptomatic persons: a ten-year follow-up.

Authors:  D R Gore
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2001-11-15       Impact factor: 3.468

6.  Etiologic factors of myelopathy. A radiographic evaluation of the aging changes in the cervical spine.

Authors:  H Hayashi; K Okada; M Hamada; K Tada; R Ueno
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  1987-01       Impact factor: 4.176

7.  Magnetic resonance imaging study on the results of surgery for cervical compression myelopathy.

Authors:  Y Okada; T Ikata; H Yamada; R Sakamoto; S Katoh
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1993-10-15       Impact factor: 3.468

8.  Anterior corpectomy and fusion for severe ossification of posterior longitudinal ligament in the cervical spine.

Authors:  Yu Chen; Deyu Chen; Xinwei Wang; Xuhai Lu; Yongfei Guo; Zhimin He; Haijun Tian
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2008-04-12       Impact factor: 3.075

9.  The developmental segmental sagittal diameter of the cervical spinal canal in patients with cervical spondylosis.

Authors:  W C Edwards; H LaRocca
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1983 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 3.468

10.  Normal cervical spine morphometry and cervical spinal stenosis in asymptomatic professional football players. Plain film radiography, multiplanar computed tomography, and magnetic resonance imaging.

Authors:  R J Herzog; J J Wiens; M F Dillingham; M J Sontag
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1991-06       Impact factor: 3.468

View more
  12 in total

1.  Impact of cervical stenosis on multiple sclerosis lesion distribution in the spinal cord.

Authors:  Daniel Gratch; David Do; Pouya Khankhanian; Matthew Schindler; J Eric Schmitt; Joseph R Berger
Journal:  Mult Scler Relat Disord       Date:  2020-07-20       Impact factor: 4.339

Review 2.  Risk factors for development of myelopathy in patients with cervical spondylotic cord compression.

Authors:  Shunji Matsunaga; Setsuro Komiya; Yoshiaki Toyama
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2013-05-23       Impact factor: 3.134

3.  Clinical relationship between cervical spinal canal stenosis and traumatic cervical spinal cord injury without major fracture or dislocation.

Authors:  Tsuneaki Takao; Yuichiro Morishita; Seiji Okada; Takeshi Maeda; Fumihiko Katoh; Takayoshi Ueta; Eiji Mori; Itaru Yugue; Osamu Kawano; Keiichiro Shiba
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2013-06-23       Impact factor: 3.134

4.  A radiographic evaluation of facet sagittal angle in cervical spinal cord injury without major fracture or dislocation.

Authors:  T Takao; K Kubota; T Maeda; S Okada; Y Morishita; E Mori; I Yugue; O Kawano; H Sakai; T Ueta; K Shiba
Journal:  Spinal Cord       Date:  2016-12-20       Impact factor: 2.772

5.  [Spondylarthrosis of the cervical spine. Therapy].

Authors:  R Radl; G Leixner; C Stihsen; R Windhager
Journal:  Orthopade       Date:  2013-09       Impact factor: 1.087

6.  Regression of Disc-Osteophyte Complexes Following Laminoplasty Versus Laminectomy with Fusion for Cervical Spondylotic Myelopathy.

Authors:  Remi M Ajiboye; Stephen D Zoller; Adedayo A Ashana; Akshay Sharma; William Sheppard; Langston T Holly
Journal:  Int J Spine Surg       Date:  2017-06-12

7.  The natural history and clinical presentation of cervical spondylotic myelopathy.

Authors:  Chester K Yarbrough; Rory K J Murphy; Wilson Z Ray; Todd J Stewart
Journal:  Adv Orthop       Date:  2011-12-22

8.  Clinical Influence of Cervical Spinal Canal Stenosis on Neurological Outcome after Traumatic Cervical Spinal Cord Injury without Major Fracture or Dislocation.

Authors:  Tsuneaki Takao; Seiji Okada; Yuichiro Morishita; Takeshi Maeda; Kensuke Kubota; Ryosuke Ideta; Eiji Mori; Itaru Yugue; Osamu Kawano; Hiroaki Sakai; Takayoshi Ueta; Keiichiro Shiba
Journal:  Asian Spine J       Date:  2016-06-16

9.  A study of the factors associated with cervical spinal disc degeneration, with a focus on bone metabolism and amino acids, in the Japanese population: a cross sectional study.

Authors:  Kanichiro Wada; Toshihiro Tanaka; Gentaro Kumagai; Hitoshi Kudo; Toru Asari; Daisuke Chiba; Seiya Ota; Keita Kamei; On Takeda; Shigeyuki Nakaji; Yasuyuki Ishibashi
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2018-05-17       Impact factor: 2.362

10.  Can a relatively large spinal cord for the dural sac influence severity of paralysis in elderly patients with cervical spinal cord injury caused by minor trauma?

Authors:  Hironori Koike; Yoichiro Hatta; Hitoshi Tonomura; Masaru Nonomura; Ryota Takatori; Masateru Nagae; Kazuya Ikoma; Yasuo Mikami
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2020-06-26       Impact factor: 1.817

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.