Morphometric analysis of cervical disc space height and interpedicular distance using computed tomography.

Background: This study utilized computed tomography (CT) to establish normative radiographic morphometric measurements of cervical disc space height (DSH) and interpedicular distance (IPD) and document the influence of patient sex, race, ethnicity, and anthropometric characteristics. Methods: Cervical CTs of 1000 patients between 18 and 35 years of age without known spinal pathology were reviewed. Statistical analyses included the assessment of associations between patient height, weight, sex, race, and ethnicity regarding DSH and IPD. Results: Irrespective of disc level, average DSH measurements were as follows: anterior height of 2.6 ± 1.0 mm, middle height of 4.1 ± 1.2 mm, and posterior height of 1.8 ± 1.0 mm. IPD was only measured between C3 and C7 vertebrae, and irrespective of disc level, the mean IPD measurement was 21.1 ± 1.5 mm. Significant differences for anterior, middle, posterior DSH, and IPD were observed in all disc levels. Significant differences in DSH and IPD were observed for all anthropometric factors of sex, race, and ethnicity relative to vertebral level. Males had significantly larger DSH and IPD measurements across all vertebral levels compared to females. Caucasians had larger DSH and IPD at select vertebral levels compared to African Americans and Hispanics. Conclusion: This study describes measurements of DSH and IPD between C2 and T1 levels in 1000 healthy 18-35-year-old subjects without known pathology. DSH and IPD measurements varied based on patient sex, race, ethnicity, and disc level.

Morphometric analysis of cervical neuroforaminal dimensions from C2-T1 using computed tomography of 1,000 patients.

BACKGROUND: Race and sex differences are not consistently reported in the literature. Fundamentally, anatomical differences of cervical neuroforaminal dimensions (CNFD) amongst these groups would be important to know. PURPOSE: To establish normative radiographic morphometric measurements of CNFD and uncover the influence of patient sex, race, and ethnicity while also considering anthropometric characteristics. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective radiographic morphometric study. PATIENT SAMPLE: A total of 1,000 patients between 18 and 35 years of age who were free of spinal pathology. OUTCOME MEASURES: Foraminal height, axial width, and area of cervical neural foramen. METHODS: Cervical CTs were reviewed to measure CNFD, defined as follows: foraminal height, axial width, and area. Statistical analyses were performed to assess associations between CNFD, and patient height, weight, sex, race, and ethnicity. RESULTS: CNFD measurements followed a bimodal distribution pattern moving caudally from C2-T1. Irrespective of disc level, cervical CNFD were as follows: left and right widths of 6.6±1.5 and 6.6±1.5 mm, heights of 9.4±2.4 and 9.4±3.2 mm, and areas of 60.0±19.5 and 60.6±20.7 mm2. Left and right foraminal width were highest at C2-C3 and lowest at C3-C4. Left and right foraminal height were highest at C7-T1 and C6-C7, respectively and lowest at C3-C4. Left and right foraminal areas were highest at C2-C3 and lowest at C3-C4. Significant differences were observed for all CNFD measurements across disc levels. CNFD did not vary based on laterality. Significant CNFD differences were observed with respect to patient sex, race, and ethnicity. Male height and area were larger compared to females. In contrast, female foraminal width was larger compared to males. The Asian cohort demonstrated the largest foraminal widths. White and Hispanic patients demonstrated the largest foraminal heights and areas. Black patients demonstrated the smallest foraminal widths, heights, and areas. Patient height and weight were only weakly correlated with CNFD measurements across all levels from C2-T1. CONCLUSIONS: This study describes 36,000 normative measurements of 12,000 foramina from C2-T1. CNFD measurements vary based on disc level, but not laterality. Contrasting left- versus right-sided neuroforamina of the same level may aid in determining the presence of unilateral stenosis. Patient sex, race, and ethnicity are associated with CNFD, while patient anthropometric factors are weakly correlated with CNFD.

Normative Measurements of L1 to S1 Neuroforaminal Dimensions Derived From Plain Film Radiography, Computed Tomography, and Magnetic Resonance Imaging.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort. OBJECTIVE: To report normative measurements of L1 to S1 lumbar neuroforamina on plain film radiography (PFR), computed tomography (CT), and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), accounting for patients' sex and ethnicity. BACKGROUND: The quantitative criteria fothe diagnosis of neuroforaminal stenosis remains unknown. Acquiring a thorough understanding of normative foraminal dimensions is a key step in formulating objective parameters for neuroforaminal stenosis. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We measured 988 images from 494 patients between 18 and 35 years old without spinal pathology who received PFR, CT, or MRI within 1 year of each other. Neuroforaminal measurements were defined as the height, area, and sagittal and axial widths. Statistical analyses were performed to assess relationships among PFR, CT, and MRI-derived neuroforaminal measurements, as well as the influence of patients' sex and ethnicity. RESULTS: 330 PFR, 377 CT, and 281 MRI were measured. Of these, 213 PFR and CT, 117 PFR and MRI, and 164 MRI and CT intrapatient images were compared. Statistically significant differences were observed among PFR, CT, and MRI measurements across all levels L1 to S1. PFR measurements were larger compared with those derived from CT and MRI. Weak-to-moderate correlations were observed between PFR and CT, PFR and MRI, and CT and MRI, with the magnitude of correlation decreasing caudally from L1 to S1. Variations in neuroforaminal anatomy were observed based on sex and ethnicity. CONCLUSION: This study reports 25,951 measurements of normal L1 to S1 neuroforaminal anatomy assessed by PFR, CT, and MRI. The values reported in this study may be used as normative reference measurements of the lumbar neuroforamina. PFR measurements of the neuroforamina are larger compared with those derived from CT and MRI across all levels from L1 to S1. There is a poor correlation between PFR, CT, and MRI when measuring the lumbar neuroforamina. Differences in neuroforaminal anatomy are evident based on patients' sex and ethnicity.

Comparison of L1-S1 neuroforaminal dimensions derived from plain film radiography versus computed tomography.

PURPOSE: To compare measurements of lumbar neuroforaminal dimensions (NFD) derived from plain film radiography (PFR) and computed tomography (CT) of young patients without spinal pathology. METHODS: We analyzed 213 patients between 18 and 35 years of age without spinal pathology who received PFR and CT within one year of each other. NFD were defined as foraminal height, sagittal anterior-to-posterior width, and area. Statistical analyses assessed correlations and differences between PFR- and CT-derived NFD measurements. RESULTS: 111 subjects were female and 102 were male. Significant differences between PFR- and CT-derived NFD measurements were observed for all levels L1-S1, with those for foraminal height listed as follows: 4.10 mm at L1-L2, 1.58 mm at L2-L3, 3.23 mm at L3-L4, 4.27 mm at L4-L5, and 1.75 mm at L5-S1. Regarding foraminal area, these differences were 72.20, 73.45, 61.80, 35.38, and 16.18 mm2, respectively. PFR-derived measurements of NFD were larger compared to those derived from CT across all levels (p < .001). Only weak (0 ≤ r ≤ .4) or moderate (.4 ≤ r ≤ .7) correlations were observed between PFR- and CT-derived NFD measurements for all levels from L1-S1. CONCLUSION: This study describes 9585 measurements from L1-S1 of neuroforaminal measurements derived from CT and plain film radiography from a sample of young patients without spinal pathology. Among these patients, plain film measurements of the neuroforamina are larger compared to those derived from CT for all levels from L1-S1. There is poor correlation and reliability between plain film and CT measurements of neuroforaminal dimensions.

Applications of Interpedicular Distance and Anteroposterior Diameter in the Approximation of the Spinal Canal Area.

INTRODUCTION:  Advancements within the field of medicine revolve around increasing the efficiency of diagnosing and subsequently treating patients. One such advancement is measurements of the central canal using artificial intelligence (AI). The authors propose the possibility of AI measuring two linear distances followed by a subsequent approximation via an area equation. The lumbar spinal canal was approximated by an area calculation using the interpedicular distance (IPD) and anteroposterior diameter (AP diameter). The three shapes evaluated were an ellipse, triangle, and rectangle. METHODS:  IPD, AP diameter, and spinal canal area from L1-L5 were measured in 555 patients using the IMPAX6 (Mortsel, Belgium: Agfa-Gevaert) picture archiving and communication system. Subsequently, an approximated area of the lumbar spinal canal, assuming an ellipse shape, was calculated using ellipse equation/approximation. Triangular and rectangular approximations were done using triangle equation/approximation and rectangle equation/approximation, respectively. The equations used are the geometric equations for the area of each shape described. For example, the triangular approximation used the IPD as the base of the triangle and the AP diameter as the height. Thus, the area approximation was calculated by half of the IPD times the AP diameter. RESULTS:  The percent error of the ellipse approximation was the lowest with a range of error from 8.44% at L1 to 15.51% at L5. The triangle approximation again was the second most accurate with a range of error starting at -26.46% at L5 to -30.96% at L1. Lastly, the percentage errors of the rectangle approximation began at 38.07% at L1 to 47.07% at L5. The ellipse and rectangle approximation consistently overestimated the area of the spinal canal, while the opposite was true for the triangle approximation. A combination of these approximations could be used to construct a second-order approximation. The approximations were all highly correlated with the authors' manual measurements. Approximations at the L2 vertebrae were highest with a correlation of 0.934 closely followed by all approximations at L5 with a value of 0.931. Approximations were least correlated with the L4 vertebrae with a value of 0.905. CONCLUSION: The correlation between the approximation equations and the measured values is significantly related. The ellipse equation best predicted the area of the spinal canal followed by the triangle and then the rectangle approximation. The percent error difference of the ellipse approximation at L1 was similar in error compared to other causes of measurement error. Continued investigation into a second-order approximation may yield a more accurate approximation.

Comparison of Nonneurological Structures at Risk During Anterior-to-Psoas Versus Transpsoas Surgical Approaches Using Abdominal CT Imaging From L1 to S1.

BACKGROUND: The kidneys, ribs, liver, spleen, and iliac crests can pose access-related issues to the disc space during both anterior-to-psoas (ATP) and transpsoas (TP) surgical approaches. The aim of this study was to identify and compare the presence and degree of obstruction caused by these structures for the ATP and TP approaches bilaterally from L1 to S1 using abdominal computed tomography. METHODS: Presence of obstruction by a given structure was recorded if the structure was within ATP or TP borders. Degree of obstruction was calculated as the quotient of the structure measurement within the ATP or TP approach divided by the entire corridor length at the point of obstruction. RESULTS: The percentage of time the left kidney was present during the ATP vs TP approaches at L1 to L2 was 44% vs 89% (P < 0.001), at L2 to L3 was 26% vs 75% (P < 0.001), and at L3 to L4 was 5% vs 19% (P < 0.001). For the right kidney, these values were 37% vs 78% (P < 0.001), 43% vs 71% (P < 0.001), and 11% vs 18% (P < 0.001). The percentage of time the left rib was present during ATP vs TP approaches was 41% vs 81% (P < 0.001) at L1 to L2 and 11% vs 26% (P = 0.413) at L2 to L3. With respect to the liver, the ATP approach was obstructed 56%, 30%, and 9% of the time at the levels of L1 to L2, L2 to L3, and L3 to L4; the liver was not present in L1 to L4 TP approach. CONCLUSIONS: This study is the first to both characterize and compare nonneurological structures at risk during ATP and TP fusion approaches bilaterally from L1 to S1 using abdominal computed tomography. Findings suggest the ATP approach poses less structures at risk relative to the TP approach with respect to the kidneys, ribs, and iliac crests bilaterally. The TP approach offers advantages compared with ATP approach with respect to the liver and spleen. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Findings from this study are clinically relevant for ATP and TP surgical approach planning.