Literature DB >> 24353842

Magnification error in digital radiographs of the cervical spine against magnetic resonance imaging measurements.

Hideki Shigematsu1, Munehisa Koizumi2, Masana Yoneda1, Jin Iida2, Takuya Oshima1, Yasuhito Tanaka2.   

Abstract

STUDY
DESIGN: Prospective study.
PURPOSE: The main purpose of this study was to clarify the range of magnification errors on digital plain radiographs and to determine if there is a correlation between the body mass index (BMI) of a patient and the magnification error. OVERVIEW OF LITERATURE: Most clinicians currently use digital plain radiography. This new method allows one to access images and measure lengths and angles more easily than with the past technologies. In addition, conventional plain radiography has magnification errors. Although few articles mention magnification errors in regards to digital radiographs, they are known to have the same errors.
METHODS: We used plain digital radiography and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to acquire images of the cervical spine with the goal of evaluating magnification errors by measuring the anteroposterior vertebral body lengths of C2 and C5. The magnification error (ME) was then calculated: ME=(length on radiograph-length on MRI)/length on MRI ×100 (%). The correlation coefficient between the magnification error and BMI was obtained using Pearson's correlation analysis.
RESULTS: Average magnification errors in C2 and C5 were approximately 18.5%±5.4% (range, 0%-30%) and 20.7%±6.3% (range, 1%-32%). There was no positive correlation between BMI and the magnification error.
CONCLUSIONS: There were magnification errors on the digital plain radiographs, and they were different in each case. Maximum magnification error differences were 30% (C2) and 31% (C5). Based on these finding, clinicians must pay attention to magnification errors when measuring lengths using digital plain radiography.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Body mass index; Cervical spine; Digital radiography; Magnification error; Picture archiving and communication system

Year:  2013        PMID: 24353842      PMCID: PMC3863651          DOI: 10.4184/asj.2013.7.4.267

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Asian Spine J        ISSN: 1976-1902


  8 in total

1.  A novel method of accurately calculating the radiological magnification of the hip.

Authors:  R J King; P Makrides; J A Gill; S Karthikeyan; S J Krikler; D R Griffin
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Br       Date:  2009-09

2.  Jefferson fractures: the role of magnification artifact in assessing transverse ligament integrity.

Authors:  J G Heller; S Viroslav; T Hudson
Journal:  J Spinal Disord       Date:  1993-10

3.  A prospective study of the progression of rheumatoid arthritis of the cervical spine.

Authors:  P M Pellicci; C S Ranawat; P Tsairis; W J Bryan
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  1981-03       Impact factor: 5.284

4.  Progression of cervical spine instabilities in rheumatoid arthritis: a prospective cohort study of outpatients over 5 years.

Authors:  Takashi Yurube; Masatoshi Sumi; Kotaro Nishida; Masato Takabatake; Kozo Kohyama; Tsukasa Matsubara; Takuma Ozaki; Koichiro Maeno; Kenichiro Kakutani; Zhongying Zhang; Minoru Doita
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2011-04-15       Impact factor: 3.468

5.  Accurate scaling of digital radiographs of the pelvis. A prospective trial of two methods.

Authors:  S Wimsey; R Pickard; G Shaw
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Br       Date:  2006-11

6.  Clinical magnification error in lateral spinal digital radiographs.

Authors:  Bheeshma Ravi; Raja Rampersaud
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2008-05-01       Impact factor: 3.468

7.  A comparison of four systems for calibration when templating for total hip replacement with digital radiography.

Authors:  M Franken; B Grimm; I Heyligers
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Br       Date:  2010-01

8.  Digital templating in hip replacement with and without radiological markers.

Authors:  G Heinert; J Hendricks; M D Loeffler
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Br       Date:  2009-04
  8 in total
  5 in total

1.  Definition of Normal Vertebral Morphometry Using NHANES-II Radiographs.

Authors:  John A Hipp; Trevor F Grieco; Patrick Newman; Charles A Reitman
Journal:  JBMR Plus       Date:  2022-09-27

2.  Thrombotic complications and tip position of transjugular chronic dialysis catheter scheduled into superior vena cava: Findings on HR-MRCP and HR-T2WI.

Authors:  Whenzheng Li; Fang Li; He Wang; Xueying Long; Obin Ghimire; Yigang Pei; Xiangcheng Xiao; Jianping Ning
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2017-06       Impact factor: 1.889

3.  Radiological Parameters of Undegenerated Cervical Vertebral Segments in a Korean Population.

Authors:  Sung Hoon Choi; HeeSang Lee; Jae Hwan Cho; Jin Il Jung; Dong-Ho Lee
Journal:  Clin Orthop Surg       Date:  2017-02-13

4.  Evaluating Cervical Sagittal Alignment in Cervical Myelopathy: Are Sitting Cervical Radiographs and Standing Whole-Spine Radiographs Equally Useful?

Authors:  Yasuhiko Morimoto; Hideki Shigematsu; Eiichiro Iwata; Masato Tanaka; Akinori Okuda; Keisuke Masuda; Yusuke Yamamoto; Toshichika Takeshima; Yoshiyuki Nakagawa; Yasuhito Tanaka
Journal:  Global Spine J       Date:  2018-11-15

5.  Analysis of lumbar lateral instability on upright left and right bending radiographs in symptomatic patients with degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis.

Authors:  Xin-Wen Wang; Xi Chen; Yang Fu; Xiao Chen; Feng Zhang; Hai-Ping Cai; Chang Ge; Wen-Zhi Zhang
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2022-01-17       Impact factor: 2.362

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.