Comparing precision of distortion-compensated and stereophotogrammetric Roentgen analysis when monitoring fusion in the cervical spine

Two methods to measure sagittal plane segmental motion in the cervical spine are compared. Translational and rotational motion was measured in nine cervical motion segments of nine patients by distortion-compensated (DCRA) as well as by stereophotogrammetric Roentgen analysis (RSA). To compare measu...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:European spine journal 2006-06, Vol.15 (6), p.774-779
Main Authors: Leivseth, Gunnar, Kolstad, Frode, Nygaard, Oystein P, Zoega, Björn, Frobin, W, Brinckmann, P
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Cervical Vertebrae - diagnostic imaging
Cervical Vertebrae - physiopathology
Cervical Vertebrae - surgery
Cohort Studies
Humans
Movement
Original
Photogrammetry - methods
Photogrammetry - statistics & numerical data
Radiography
Rotation
Spinal Diseases - diagnostic imaging
Spinal Diseases - physiopathology
Spinal Diseases - surgery
Spinal Fusion
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Two methods to measure sagittal plane segmental motion in the cervical spine are compared. Translational and rotational motion was measured in nine cervical motion segments of nine patients by distortion-compensated (DCRA) as well as by stereophotogrammetric Roentgen analysis (RSA). To compare measurement precision of the new DCRA protocol with the established RSA technique under realistic clinical conditions and to discuss advantages and disadvantages of both methods in clinical studies. RSA constitutes the most precise method available to assess segmental motion or to monitor fusion in the cervical spine. Due to the invasive nature of the procedure there is an interest in alternative, non-invasive protocols, based on conventional, lateral radiographic views. In nine patients, segmental motion of nine cervical segments with spinal surgery and fusion had previously been assessed from stereo views by RSA. From the archive radiographs, sagittal plane segmental motion was re-assessed by DCRA. Results for sagittal plane translational and rotational motion obtained by both methods are compared. With respect to RSA, sagittal plane rotation was determined by DCRA with an error of 2.4 degrees and a mean difference not significantly different from zero. Sagittal plane translation was determined by DCRA with an error of less than 0.78 mm and a mean difference not significantly different from zero. As two methods are compared, these errors represent the combined (propagated) errors of RSA and DCRA. Averaged over the cohort investigated, measurement of sagittal plane segmental motion exhibited no significant difference between DCRA and RSA.
ISSN:0940-6719
1432-0932
DOI:10.1007/s00586-005-0929-z