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: Segmental lumbar lordosis: manual versus computer-assisted measurement using seven different techniques.
    Author: Schuler TC, Subach BR, Branch CL, Foley KT, Burkus JK, Lumbar Spine Study Group.
    Journal: J Spinal Disord Tech; 2004 Oct; 17(5):372-9. PubMed ID: 15385876.
    Abstract:
    OBJECTIVES: Obliteration of end-plate landmarks by interbody fusion has made the traditional measurement of segmental lumbar lordosis nearly impossible. Because the L4-L5 and L5-S1 levels are most likely to be subjected to fusion procedures or arthroplasty and contribute to more than half of normal lumbar lordosis, it is crucial to identify a reproducible and accurate means of measuring segmental lordosis at these levels. METHODS: Twelve spinal surgeons measured lordosis at L4-L5 and L5-S1 on 10 separate radiographs using three techniques for L4-L5 and four techniques for L5-S1. With use of identical radiographs, measurements first were made using a manual method and then were repeated with a computer-assisted method. Measurements were analyzed for both intraobserver and interobserver error. RESULTS: The individual data demonstrated an intraobserver variance of 9.56 and a standard deviation of 3.092 for computerized measurements compared with 7.742 and 2.782 for manual measurements. The interobserver variance was 4.107 with a standard deviation of 2.027 for the computerized group compared with 4.221 and 2.055 for manual measurements. When analyzed as a group to evaluate interobserver error, the pooled data yielded variance of 19.235 for the computerized group and 19.117 for the manual measurements. CONCLUSIONS: Variance calculations identified the Cobb technique and the posterior vertebral body technique as the least variable measurement techniques for the L4-L5 and L5-S1 levels, respectively; however, there was no statistical significance. In direct comparison, the manual and computer-assisted techniques were found to be statistically equivalent with similar degrees of variance. We believe that the anterior vertebral technique, which did not demonstrate a significant difference from other techniques, will prove to be the most reliable method of assessing segmental lumbar lordosis in patients before surgery, after interbody fusion, and after motion-sparing disc arthroplasty.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]