These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: The optimal radiologic method for assessing spinal canal compromise and cord compression in patients with cervical spinal cord injury. Part II: Results of a multicenter study.
    Author: Fehlings MG, Rao SC, Tator CH, Skaf G, Arnold P, Benzel E, Dickman C, Cuddy B, Green B, Hitchon P, Northrup B, Sonntag V, Wagner F, Wilberger J.
    Journal: Spine (Phila Pa 1976); 1999 Mar 15; 24(6):605-13. PubMed ID: 10101829.
    Abstract:
    STUDY DESIGN: A multicenter, retrospective study using computed tomographic and magnetic resonance imaging data to establish quantitative, reliable criteria of canal compromise and cord compression in patients with cervical spinal cord injury. OBJECTIVES: To develop and validate a radiologic assessment tool of spinal canal compromise and cord compression in cervical spinal cord injury for use in clinical trials. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: There are few quantitative, reliable criteria for radiologic measurement of cervical spinal canal compromise or cord compression after acute spinal cord injury. METHODS: The study included 71 patients (55 men, 16 women; mean age, 39.7 +/- 18.7 years) with acute cervical spinal cord injury. Causes of spinal cord injury included motor vehicle accidents (n = 36), falls (n = 20), water-related injuries (n = 8), sports (n = 5), assault (n = 1), and farm accidents (n = 1). Canal compromise was measured on computed tomographic scan and T1- and T2-weighted magnetic resonance imaging, and cord compression at the level of maximum injury was measured on T1- and T2-weighted magnetic resonance imaging. All films were assessed by two independent observers. RESULTS: There was a strong correlation of canal compromise and/or cord compression measurements between axial and midsagittal computed tomography, and between axial and midsagittal T2-weighted magnetic resonance imaging. Spinal canal compromise assessed by computed tomography showed a significant although moderate correlation with spinal cord compression assessed by T1- and T2-weighted magnetic resonance imaging. Virtually all patients with canal compromise of 25% or more on computed tomographic scan had evidence of some degree of cord compression on magnetic resonance imaging, but a large number of patients with less than 25% canal compromise on computed tomographic scan also had evidence on magnetic resonance imaging of cord compression. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with cervical spinal cord injury, the midsagittal T1- and T2-weighted magnetic resonance imaging provides an objective, quantifiable, and reliable assessment of spinal cord compression that cannot be adequately assessed by computed tomography alone.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]