Literature DB >> 33772659

Sagittal balance of the cervical spine: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Parisa Azimi1, Taravat Yazdanian2, Edward C Benzel3, Yong Hai4, Ali Montazeri5.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to compare the cervical sagittal parameters between patients with cervical spine disorder and asymptomatic controls.
METHODS: Two independent authors systematically searched online databases including Pubmed, Scopus, Cochrane library, and Web of Science up to June 2020. Cervical sagittal balance parameters, such as T1 slope, cervical SVA (cSVA), and spine cranial angle (SCA), were compared between the cervical spine in healthy, symptomatic, and pre-operative participants. Where possible, we pooled data using random-effects meta-analysis, by CMA software. Heterogeneity and publication bias were assessed using the I-squared statistic and funnel plots, respectively.
RESULTS: A total of 102 studies, comprising 13,802 cases (52.7% female), were included in this meta-analysis. We used the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) to evaluate the quality of studies included in this review. Funnel plot and Begg's test did not indicate obvious publication bias. The pooled analysis reveals that the mean (SD) values were: T1 slope (degree), 24.5 (0.98), 25.7 (0.99), 25.4 (0.34); cSVA (mm), 18.7 (1.76), 22.7 (0.66), 22.4 (0.68) for healthy population, symptomatic, and pre-operative assessment, respectively. The mean value of the SCA (degree) was 79.5 (3.55) and 75.6 (10.3) for healthy and symptomatic groups, respectively. Statistical differences were observed between the groups (all P values < 0.001).
CONCLUSION: The findings showed that the T1 slope and the cSVA were significantly lower among patients with cervical spine disorder compared to controls and higher for the SCA. Further well-conducted studies are needed to complement our findings.
© 2021. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Cervical SVA; Cervical spine; Sagittal balance; Spine cranial angle; T1 slope

Year:  2021        PMID: 33772659     DOI: 10.1007/s00586-021-06825-0

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Spine J        ISSN: 0940-6719            Impact factor:   3.134


  80 in total

1.  Classification of sagittal imbalance based on spinal alignment and compensatory mechanisms.

Authors:  Claudio Lamartina; Pedro Berjano
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2014-02-28       Impact factor: 3.134

2.  Does whole-spine lateral radiograph with clavicle positioning reflect the correct cervical sagittal alignment?

Authors:  Sang-Min Park; Kwang-Sup Song; Seung-Hwan Park; Hyun Kang; K Daniel Riew
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2014-08-28       Impact factor: 3.134

3.  Comparison of cervical sagittal parameters among patients with neck pain and healthy controls: a comparative cross-sectional study.

Authors:  Morteza Faghih Jouibari; Jean Charles Le Huec; Mohammad Hosein Ranjbar Hameghavandi; Navid Moghadam; Farzin Farahbakhsh; Masoud Khadivi; Mohsen Rostami; Ramin Kordi
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2019-08-23       Impact factor: 3.134

4.  Relationship between cervical sagittal alignment and quality of life in ankylosing spondylitis.

Authors:  Jung Sub Lee; Myung Soo Youn; Jong Ki Shin; Tae Sik Goh; Sung Shik Kang
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2014-08-12       Impact factor: 3.134

5.  Influence of cervical spine position on the radiographic parameters of the thoracic inlet alignment.

Authors:  Piotr Janusz; Marcin Tyrakowski; Pawel Glowka; Roosevelt Offoha; Kris Siemionow
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2015-05-19       Impact factor: 3.134

6.  The impact of standing regional cervical sagittal alignment on outcomes in posterior cervical fusion surgery.

Authors:  Jessica A Tang; Justin K Scheer; Justin S Smith; Vedat Deviren; Shay Bess; Robert A Hart; Virginie Lafage; Christopher I Shaffrey; Frank Schwab; Christopher P Ames
Journal:  Neurosurgery       Date:  2012-09       Impact factor: 4.654

Review 7.  Cervical sagittal balance: a biomechanical perspective can help clinical practice.

Authors:  Avinash G Patwardhan; Saeed Khayatzadeh; Robert M Havey; Leonard I Voronov; Zachary A Smith; Olivia Kalmanson; Alexander J Ghanayem; William Sears
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2017-11-06       Impact factor: 3.134

Review 8.  Cervical spine alignment, sagittal deformity, and clinical implications: a review.

Authors:  Justin K Scheer; Jessica A Tang; Justin S Smith; Frank L Acosta; Themistocles S Protopsaltis; Benjamin Blondel; Shay Bess; Christopher I Shaffrey; Vedat Deviren; Virginie Lafage; Frank Schwab; Christopher P Ames
Journal:  J Neurosurg Spine       Date:  2013-06-14

Review 9.  Which parameters are relevant in sagittal balance analysis of the cervical spine? A literature review.

Authors:  Fong Poh Ling; T Chevillotte; A Leglise; W Thompson; C Bouthors; Jean-Charles Le Huec
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2018-01-13       Impact factor: 3.134

10.  Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement.

Authors:  David Moher; Alessandro Liberati; Jennifer Tetzlaff; Douglas G Altman
Journal:  PLoS Med       Date:  2009-07-21       Impact factor: 11.069

View more
  3 in total

1.  Spinopelvic measurements of sagittal balance with deep learning: systematic review and critical evaluation.

Authors:  Tomaž Vrtovec; Bulat Ibragimov
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2022-03-12       Impact factor: 2.721

2.  Does Improvement towards a Normal Cervical Sagittal Configuration Aid in the Management of Lumbosacral Radiculopathy: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

Authors:  Ibrahim Moustafa Moustafa; Aliaa Attiah Mohamed Diab; Deed Eric Harrison
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2022-09-29       Impact factor: 4.964

3.  Static Body Balance in Children and Expert Adults Ballroom Dancers: Insights from Spectral Analysis of Shifts.

Authors:  Antonio Cicchella
Journal:  Biology (Basel)       Date:  2021-12-08
  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.