Literature DB >> 31558777

Assessment of degenerative cervical stenosis on T2-weighted MR imaging: sensitivity to change and reliability of mid-sagittal and axial plane metrics.

Keerthana Sritharan1, Uphar Chamoli2,3, Jeffrey Kuan4, Ashish D Diwan1.   

Abstract

STUDY
DESIGN: A retrospective cross-sectional study.
OBJECTIVE: To assess the sensitivity to change and reliability of various mid-sagittal and axial plane metrics in the assessment of patients with single-level degenerative cervical stenosis on T2-weighted MR imaging.
SETTING: A diagnostic MR imaging facility in Sydney (Australia).
METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed T2-weighted MR images of 85 consecutive patients (48 M and 37 F) with single-level degenerative cervical stenosis. Canal compromise and cord compression were evaluated using three mid-sagittal plane metrics (M1, M2, and M3) and two axial plane metrics (M4 and M5), at the level of stenosis and nonstenotic cephalad and caudal levels (controls). Sensitivity to change (SC) for each metric was evaluated as the percentage deviation of the measured value from the estimated normal value based on cephalad and caudal controls. Reliability for each metric was evaluated using intraclass correlation coefficients.
RESULTS: Degenerative cervical stenosis showed a bimodal distribution peaking at C5-6 (n = 32) and C3-4 (n = 29) levels. The changes in the canal and cord geometry along the rostrocaudal axis were inconsistent. Across all individual subjects (reflecting a range of stenosis severity), M3 (-32.87% ± 10.60%) was more sensitive to change compared with M1 (16.64% ± 16.48%) and M2 (-23.95% ± 11.12%). Similarly, M4 (-24.62% ± 12.17%) was more sensitive to change compared with M5 (-6.71% ± 11.08%). The level of reliability was "moderate" to "excellent" for mid-sagittal plane measurements, and "poor" to "excellent" for axial plane measurements.
CONCLUSION: Changes in canal dimensions in the mid-sagittal plane and cord shape in the axial plane are sensitive indicators of degenerative cervical stenosis on T2-weighted MR images.

Entities:  

Year:  2019        PMID: 31558777     DOI: 10.1038/s41393-019-0358-1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Spinal Cord        ISSN: 1362-4393            Impact factor:   2.772


  20 in total

1.  Factors affecting the surgical results of expansive laminoplasty for cervical spondylotic myelopathy.

Authors:  Sung Soo Chung; Chong Suh Lee; Kwang Hoon Chung
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2002-06-08       Impact factor: 3.075

2.  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

3.  Normal morphology, age-related changes and abnormal findings of the cervical spine. Part II: Magnetic resonance imaging of over 1,200 asymptomatic subjects.

Authors:  Fumihiko Kato; Yasutsugu Yukawa; Kota Suda; Masatsune Yamagata; Takayoshi Ueta
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2012-08       Impact factor: 3.134

Review 4.  Magnetic resonance imaging assessment of degenerative cervical myelopathy: a review of structural changes and measurement techniques.

Authors:  Aria Nouri; Allan R Martin; David Mikulis; Michael G Fehlings
Journal:  Neurosurg Focus       Date:  2016-06       Impact factor: 4.047

5.  A Guideline of Selecting and Reporting Intraclass Correlation Coefficients for Reliability Research.

Authors:  Terry K Koo; Mae Y Li
Journal:  J Chiropr Med       Date:  2016-03-31

Review 6.  Degenerative Cervical Myelopathy: A Spectrum of Related Disorders Affecting the Aging Spine.

Authors:  Lindsay Tetreault; Christina L Goldstein; Paul Arnold; James Harrop; Alan Hilibrand; Aria Nouri; Michael G Fehlings
Journal:  Neurosurgery       Date:  2015-10       Impact factor: 4.654

7.  The optimal radiologic method for assessing spinal canal compromise and cord compression in patients with cervical spinal cord injury. Part II: Results of a multicenter study.

Authors:  M G Fehlings; S C Rao; C H Tator; G Skaf; P Arnold; E Benzel; C Dickman; B Cuddy; B Green; P Hitchon; B Northrup; V Sonntag; F Wagner; J Wilberger
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1999-03-15       Impact factor: 3.468

8.  Prognostic factors that affect the surgical outcome of the laminoplasty in cervical spondylotic myelopathy.

Authors:  Jae-Sung Ahn; June-Kyu Lee; Bo-Kun Kim
Journal:  Clin Orthop Surg       Date:  2010-05-04

9.  Normative MR cervical spinal canal dimensions.

Authors:  Erika J Ulbrich; Christian Schraner; Chris Boesch; Juerg Hodler; André Busato; Suzanne E Anderson; Sandra Eigenheer; Heinz Zimmermann; Matthias Sturzenegger
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2013-12-12       Impact factor: 11.105

10.  Clinical and magnetic resonance imaging predictors of the surgical outcomes of patients with cervical spondylotic myelopathy.

Authors:  Xiang-Yu Li; Shi-Bao Lu; Xiang-Yao Sun; Chao Kong; Ma-Chao Guo; Si-Yuan Sun; Jun-Zhe Ding; Yi-Ming Yang
Journal:  Clin Neurol Neurosurg       Date:  2018-09-05       Impact factor: 1.876

View more
  1 in total

1.  Are surgical outcomes for one level anterior decompression and fusion associated with MRI parameters for degenerative cervical myelopathy?

Authors:  Luqiang Qu; Shaofeng Yang; Lijie Yuan; Junjie Niu; Dawei Song; Songping Yang; Huilin Yang; Jun Zou
Journal:  Front Surg       Date:  2022-09-21
  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.