Michael C Chiang, Albert Jiao, Melvin C Makhni, Jacob C Mandell, Zacharia Isaac
{"title":"与俯卧位 CT 成像相比，站立屈伸位片上的动态不稳定性被低估了。","authors":"Michael C Chiang, Albert Jiao, Melvin C Makhni, Jacob C Mandell, Zacharia Isaac","doi":"10.1097/BSD.0000000000001725","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Study design/setting: </strong>Single center retrospective cohort study.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>We performed a retrospective study evaluating the incidence and degree of L4-5 anterior spondylolisthesis in patients with standard supine MRI, standing flexion-extension radiographs, and prone CT. We hypothesize that prone CT imaging will provide greater sensitivity for instability compared with conventional flexion extension or supine positions.</p><p><strong>Summary of background data: </strong>Dynamic lumbar instability evaluated by flexion-extension radiographs may underestimate the degree of lumbar spondylolisthesis. Despite efforts to characterize dynamic instability, significant variability remains in current guidelines regarding the most appropriate imaging modalities to adequately evaluate instability.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We assessed single-level (L4-5) anterolisthesis between 2014 and 2022 with standing lateral conventional radiographs (CR), flexion-extension images, prone CT images (CT), or supine MRI images (MRI).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We identified 102 patients with L4-5 anterolisthesis. The average translation (±SD) measured were 4.9±2.2 mm (CR), 2.5±2.6 mm (CT), and 3.7±2.6 mm (MRI) (P<0.001). The mean difference in anterolisthesis among imaging modalities was 2.7±1.8 mm between CR and CT (P<0.001), 1.8±1.4 mm between CR and MRI (P<0.001), and 1.6±1.4 mm between CT and MRI (P=0.252). Ninety-two of 102 patients (90.2%) showed greater anterolisthesis on CR compared with CT, 72 of 102 (70.6%) comparing CR to MRI, and 27 of 102 (26.5%) comparing CT to MRI. We found that 17.6% of patients exhibited ≥3 mm anterior translation comparing CR with MRI, whereas 38.2% of patients were identified comparing CR with CT imaging (χ2 test P=0.0009, post hoc Fisher exact test P=0.0006 between CR and CT). Only 5.9% of patients had comparable degrees of instability between flexion-standing.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Prone CT imaging revealed the greatest degree of single L4-5 segmental instability compared with flexion-extension radiographs.</p>","PeriodicalId":10457,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Spine Surgery","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Dynamic Instability Is Underestimated on Standing Flexion-Extension Films When Compared With Prone CT Imaging.\",\"authors\":\"Michael C Chiang, Albert Jiao, Melvin C Makhni, Jacob C Mandell, Zacharia Isaac\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/BSD.0000000000001725\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Study design/setting: </strong>Single center retrospective cohort study.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>We performed a retrospective study evaluating the incidence and degree of L4-5 anterior spondylolisthesis in patients with standard supine MRI, standing flexion-extension radiographs, and prone CT. We hypothesize that prone CT imaging will provide greater sensitivity for instability compared with conventional flexion extension or supine positions.</p><p><strong>Summary of background data: </strong>Dynamic lumbar instability evaluated by flexion-extension radiographs may underestimate the degree of lumbar spondylolisthesis. Despite efforts to characterize dynamic instability, significant variability remains in current guidelines regarding the most appropriate imaging modalities to adequately evaluate instability.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We assessed single-level (L4-5) anterolisthesis between 2014 and 2022 with standing lateral conventional radiographs (CR), flexion-extension images, prone CT images (CT), or supine MRI images (MRI).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We identified 102 patients with L4-5 anterolisthesis. The average translation (±SD) measured were 4.9±2.2 mm (CR), 2.5±2.6 mm (CT), and 3.7±2.6 mm (MRI) (P<0.001). The mean difference in anterolisthesis among imaging modalities was 2.7±1.8 mm between CR and CT (P<0.001), 1.8±1.4 mm between CR and MRI (P<0.001), and 1.6±1.4 mm between CT and MRI (P=0.252). Ninety-two of 102 patients (90.2%) showed greater anterolisthesis on CR compared with CT, 72 of 102 (70.6%) comparing CR to MRI, and 27 of 102 (26.5%) comparing CT to MRI. We found that 17.6% of patients exhibited ≥3 mm anterior translation comparing CR with MRI, whereas 38.2% of patients were identified comparing CR with CT imaging (χ2 test P=0.0009, post hoc Fisher exact test P=0.0006 between CR and CT). Only 5.9% of patients had comparable degrees of instability between flexion-standing.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Prone CT imaging revealed the greatest degree of single L4-5 segmental instability compared with flexion-extension radiographs.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10457,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical Spine Surgery\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical Spine Surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/BSD.0000000000001725\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Spine Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/BSD.0000000000001725","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Dynamic Instability Is Underestimated on Standing Flexion-Extension Films When Compared With Prone CT Imaging.
Study design/setting: Single center retrospective cohort study.
Objective: We performed a retrospective study evaluating the incidence and degree of L4-5 anterior spondylolisthesis in patients with standard supine MRI, standing flexion-extension radiographs, and prone CT. We hypothesize that prone CT imaging will provide greater sensitivity for instability compared with conventional flexion extension or supine positions.
Summary of background data: Dynamic lumbar instability evaluated by flexion-extension radiographs may underestimate the degree of lumbar spondylolisthesis. Despite efforts to characterize dynamic instability, significant variability remains in current guidelines regarding the most appropriate imaging modalities to adequately evaluate instability.
Methods: We assessed single-level (L4-5) anterolisthesis between 2014 and 2022 with standing lateral conventional radiographs (CR), flexion-extension images, prone CT images (CT), or supine MRI images (MRI).
Results: We identified 102 patients with L4-5 anterolisthesis. The average translation (±SD) measured were 4.9±2.2 mm (CR), 2.5±2.6 mm (CT), and 3.7±2.6 mm (MRI) (P<0.001). The mean difference in anterolisthesis among imaging modalities was 2.7±1.8 mm between CR and CT (P<0.001), 1.8±1.4 mm between CR and MRI (P<0.001), and 1.6±1.4 mm between CT and MRI (P=0.252). Ninety-two of 102 patients (90.2%) showed greater anterolisthesis on CR compared with CT, 72 of 102 (70.6%) comparing CR to MRI, and 27 of 102 (26.5%) comparing CT to MRI. We found that 17.6% of patients exhibited ≥3 mm anterior translation comparing CR with MRI, whereas 38.2% of patients were identified comparing CR with CT imaging (χ2 test P=0.0009, post hoc Fisher exact test P=0.0006 between CR and CT). Only 5.9% of patients had comparable degrees of instability between flexion-standing.
Conclusions: Prone CT imaging revealed the greatest degree of single L4-5 segmental instability compared with flexion-extension radiographs.
期刊介绍：
Clinical Spine Surgery is the ideal journal for the busy practicing spine surgeon or trainee, as it is the only journal necessary to keep up to date with new clinical research and surgical techniques. Readers get to watch leaders in the field debate controversial topics in a new controversies section, and gain access to evidence-based reviews of important pathologies in the systematic reviews section. The journal features a surgical technique complete with a video, and a tips and tricks section that allows surgeons to review the important steps prior to a complex procedure.
Clinical Spine Surgery provides readers with primary research studies, specifically level 1, 2 and 3 studies, ensuring that articles that may actually change a surgeon’s practice will be read and published. Each issue includes a brief article that will help a surgeon better understand the business of healthcare, as well as an article that will help a surgeon understand how to interpret increasingly complex research methodology. Clinical Spine Surgery is your single source for up-to-date, evidence-based recommendations for spine care.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
