Quantitative assessment of the lumbar spinal canal by computed tomography.

Ullrich, Christopher G.; Binet, Eugene F.; Sanecki, M G; Kieffer, Stephen A.

doi:10.1148/radiology.134.1.7350593

Cited by 214 publications

(96 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The border between cortical bone and soft tissue was clear, and the perimeter of the mandibular cortex could be traced. 21 Hashiba 14 reported that the mandibular volume was significantly larger in skeletal Class I than in Class II, whereas Deguchi et al 16 observed no significant differences among the maxillofacial morphology classifications in 30 adult female Japanese. Our findings in 58 adult male and 60 female Japanese were similar to those reported by this latter study.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Evaluation of mandibular volume using cone-beam computed tomography and correlation with cephalometric values

Katayama

Yamaguchi

Sugiura

et al. 2013

The Angle Orthodontist

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: To investigate the association between maxillofacial morphology and mandibular bone volume in patients with skeletal malocclusion. Materials and Methods: Subjects were 118 adult Japanese (58 males and 60 females). Skeletal malocclusion was classified, based on cephalometric analysis, into skeletal Classes I (21u # ANB , 4u), II (ANB $ 4u), and III (ANB , 21u). Using cone-beam computed tomography and threedimensional image analysis software, the dental crowns and mandible were separated, with only the mandible extracted. This was then reconstructed as a three-dimensional model, from which the mandibular volume was measured. Results: No significant difference in mandibular volume was noted among skeletal Classes I, II, and III, nor was there any significant correlation between mandibular volume and the ANB, SNB, or mandibular plane angles. There was occasional and limited correlation between mandible volume and gonial angle and certain cephalometric distance parameters. Conclusion: We conclude that proper understanding of the three-dimensional maxillofacial morphology requires not only cephalometric radiographic tracings but also high-resolution analysis of the mandibular area, width, and volume. (Angle Orthod. 2014;84:337-342.)

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Evaluation of mandibular volume using cone-beam computed tomography and correlation with cephalometric values

Katayama

Yamaguchi

Sugiura

et al. 2013

The Angle Orthodontist

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Several studies have attempted morphometrically to characterize the lumbar spine in individuals with degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis (DLSS) with diverse results [3,[14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22]. Some radiological studies have reported that the changes in the anterior-posterior (AP) diameter, transverse diameter and cross-section area (CSA) of the spinal canal and dural sac are risk factors for developing spinal stenosis [16,17,23,24].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis and lumbar spine configuration

et al. 2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

As life expectancy increases, degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis (DLSS) becomes a common health problem among the elderly. DLSS is usually caused by degenerative changes in bony and/or soft tissue elements. The poor correlation between radiological manifestations and the clinical picture emphasizes the fact that more studies are required to determine the natural course of this syndrome. Our aim was to reveal the association between lower lumbar spine configuration and DLSS. Two groups were studied: the first included 67 individuals with DLSS (mean age 66 ± 10) and the second 100 individuals (mean age 63.4 ± 13) without DLSS-related symptoms. Both groups underwent CT images (Philips Brilliance 64) and the following measurements were performed: a crosssection area of the dural sac, vertebral body dimensions (height, length and width), AP diameter of the bony spinal canal, lumbar lordosis and sacral slope angles. All measurements were taken at L3 to S1. Vertebral body lengths were significantly greater in the DLSS group at all levels compared to the control, whereas anterior vertebral body heights (L3, L4, L5) and middle vertebral heights (L3, L5) were significantly smaller in the LSS group. Lumbar lordosis, sacral slope and bony spinal canal were significantly smaller in the DLSS compared to the control. We conclude that the size and shape of vertebral bodies and canals significantly differed between the study groups. A tentative model is suggested to explain the association between these characteristics and the development of degenerative spinal stenosis.

show abstract

“…The CT has become the most used X-ray means. It makes possible a precise measurement of canal dimensions and the diagnosis of the canal narrowness [3]. It has been the imaging means used in our study.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Normative dimensions of lumbar canal and dural sac by computer tomography in Togo

Amadou¹,

Sonhaye²,

James³

et al. 2017

Med Imaging Radiol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: To determine through CT scan, the biometrics of the spinal canal and lumbar dural sac of adults in Togo. Material and method: Twelve month prospective study at Campus Teaching Hospital and Sylvanus Olympio Univesristy Hopsital Center, concerning people over 18 years of age who presented neither any clinical sign nor spinal defect. Distances measured were the antero posterior diameter (APD1) and inner pedicular diameter (IPD) of the lumbar canal, the antero posterior diameter (APD2) and transverse diameter (TD) of the dural sac, followed by the evaluation of APD2/APD1 (R1) and TD/IPD (R2) ratio. Results: The mean age was 38+/9.34 years. The general average APD of the lumbar canal (APD1) was 15.41±0.55mm, with a minimal average of 10.48±0.57mm and a maximal average of 25.00±2.60mm. The general average IPD was 23.27±1.67mm, with a minimal average of 13.68±1.46mm and a maximal average of 33.68±1.46mm. The average APD of the dural sac (APD2) was 11.60±0.66mm, with a minimal average of 10.7±0.66mm and a maximal average of 10.7±0.66mm. The average TD of the dural sac was 15.55±1.54mm, with a minimal average of 14.03±2.43mm and a maximal average of 17.63±1.82mm. The evaluation of the ratio ADP2/ADP1 (R1) found general average R1 of 0.80±0.04, with a minimal average R1 of 0.76±0.06 and a maximal average R1 of 0.85±0.07. The ratio TD/IPD (R2) found an average R2 of 0.69±0.14, with a minimal average of 0.5±0.12 and a maximal average of 0.84±0.08. Conclusion:The diameters of the lumbar canal and dural sac in Togo do not differ significantly from those described in the literature.

show abstract

Quantitative assessment of the lumbar spinal canal by computed tomography.

Cited by 214 publications

References 0 publications

Evaluation of mandibular volume using cone-beam computed tomography and correlation with cephalometric values

Evaluation of mandibular volume using cone-beam computed tomography and correlation with cephalometric values

Degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis and lumbar spine configuration

Normative dimensions of lumbar canal and dural sac by computer tomography in Togo

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About