ABSTRACT
This paper is the third in a series of three that organizes the complex anatomy of the cervical, thoracic, and lumbar spinal ligaments. It describes and color-codes the anatomy and nomenclature of the capsular membranes and minor spinal ligaments. The first two articles describe the dorsal and ventral ligaments, respectively.
Subject(s)
Ligaments/anatomy & histology , Spine/anatomy & histology , Terminology as Topic , HumansABSTRACT
This paper is the second in a series of three that organizes the complex anatomy of the cervical, thoracic, and lumbar spinal ligaments. It describes and colorcodes the anatomy and nomenclature of the ventral ligaments. A prior article has described the dorsal ligaments, and a future article will illustrate the capsular joints and minor spinal ligaments.
Subject(s)
Ligaments/anatomy & histology , Spine/anatomy & histology , Terminology as Topic , Anatomy, Cross-Sectional/education , Humans , Magnetic Resonance Imaging/methods , Spinal Injuries/diagnosis , Tomography, X-Ray Computed/methodsSubject(s)
Longitudinal Ligaments/injuries , Longitudinal Ligaments/pathology , Magnetic Resonance Imaging , Adolescent , Adult , Child , Female , Humans , Male , Middle AgedABSTRACT
This article is the first in a series of three that organizes the complex anatomy of the cervical, thoracic, and lumbar spinal ligaments. It describes and color-codes the anatomy and nomenclature of the dorsal ligaments. The following articles will describe the ventral ligaments, and the capsular membranes and minor ligaments.
Subject(s)
Ligaments/anatomy & histology , Spinal Cord/anatomy & histology , Terminology as Topic , HumansABSTRACT
PURPOSE: To determine the weighted average sensitivity of magnetic resonance (MR) imaging in the prospective detection of acute neck injury and to compare these findings with those of a comprehensive conventional radiographic assessment. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Conventional radiography and MR imaging were performed in 199 patients presenting to a level 1 trauma center with suspected cervical spine injury. Weighted sensitivities and specificities were calculated, and a weighted average across eight vertebral levels from C1 to T1 was formed. Fourteen parameters indicative of acute injury were tabulated. RESULTS: Fifty-eight patients had 172 acute cervical injuries. MR imaging depicted 136 (79%) acute abnormalities and conventional radiography depicted 39 (23%). For assessment of acute fractures, MR images (weighted average sensitivity, 43%; CI: 21%, 66%) were comparable to conventional radiographs (weighted average sensitivity, 48%; CI: 30%, 65%). MR imaging was superior to conventional radiography in the evaluation of pre- or paravertebral hemorrhage or edema, anterior or posterior longitudinal ligament injury, traumatic disk herniation, cord edema, and cord compression. Cord injuries were associated with cervical spine spondylosis (P < .05), acute fracture (P < .001), and canal stenosis (P < .001). CONCLUSION: MR imaging is more accurate than radiography in the detection of a wide spectrum of neck injuries, and further study is warranted of its potential effect on medical decision making, clinical outcome, and cost-effectiveness.
