Haas Jason W, Oakley Paul A, Betz Joseph W, Miller Jason E, Jaeger Jason O, Moustafa Ibrahim M, Harrison Deed E
CBP NonProfit, Inc., Eagle, ID 83616, USA.
Kinesiology and Health Science, York University, Toronto, ON M3J 1P3, Canada.
J Clin Med. 2024 Apr 24;13(9):2502. doi: 10.3390/jcm13092502.
This study assessed the relationship between cervical spine parameters taken on standing full-spine lateral radiographic images compared to sectional lateral cervical radiographs. Full-spine (FS) and sectional lateral cervical (LC) radiographs from four spine treatment facilities across the USA retrospectively provided data collected on 220 persons to assess the comparison of three sagittal cervical radiographic measurements between the two views. The measures included cervical lordosis using the absolute rotation angle from C2-C7, sagittal cervical translation of C2-C7, and atlas plane angle to horizontal. Linear correlation and R models were used for statistical comparison of the measures for the two views. The mean values of the three measurements were statistically different from each other: C2-C7 translation (FS = 19.84 ± 11.98 vs. LC = 21.18 ± 11.8), C2-C7 lordosis (FS = -15.3 ± 14.63 vs. LC = -18.32 ± 13.16), and atlas plane (FS = -19.99 ± 8.88 vs. LC = -22.56 ± 8.93), where all values were < 0.001. Weak-to-moderate-to-strong correlations existed between the full-spine and sectional lateral cervical radiographic variables. The R values varied based on the measurement were R = 0.768 ( < 0.001) for sagittal cervical translation of C2-C7 (strong), R = 0.613 ( < 0.001) for the absolute rotation angle C2-C7 (moderate), and R = 0.406 ( < 0.001) for the atlas plane line (weak). Though a linear correlation was identified, there were consistent intra-person differences between the measurements on the full spine versus sectional lateral cervical radiographic views, where the full-spine view consistently underestimated the magnitude of the variables. Key sagittal cervical radiographic measurements on the full spine versus sectional lateral cervical radiographic views show striking intra-person differences. The findings of this study confirm that full spine versus sectional lateral cervical radiographic views provide different biomechanical magnitudes of cervical sagittal alignment, and caution should be exercised by health care providers as these are not interchangeable. We recommend the LC view for measurement of cervical sagittal alignment variables.
本研究评估了站立位全脊柱侧位X线片与颈椎节段侧位X线片上颈椎参数之间的关系。回顾性地从美国四个脊柱治疗机构收集了220人的全脊柱(FS)和颈椎节段侧位(LC)X线片数据,以评估两种视图下三个颈椎矢状位X线测量值的比较。测量指标包括使用C2-C7的绝对旋转角度测量颈椎前凸、C2-C7的矢状位平移以及寰椎平面与水平面的夹角。采用线性相关性和R模型对两种视图下的测量指标进行统计学比较。这三项测量的平均值在统计学上彼此不同:C2-C7平移(FS = 19.84±11.98,而LC = 21.18±11.8)、C2-C7前凸(FS = -15.3±14.63,而LC = -18.32±13.16)和寰椎平面(FS = -19.99±8.88,而LC = -22.56±8.93),所有这些值均<0.001。全脊柱与颈椎节段侧位X线变量之间存在弱到中到强的相关性。根据测量指标不同,R值有所变化:C2-C7矢状位平移的R = 0.768(<0.001,强相关),C2-C7绝对旋转角度的R = 0.613(<0.001,中度相关),寰椎平面线的R = 0.406(<0.001,弱相关)。虽然确定了线性相关性,但全脊柱视图与颈椎节段侧位X线视图的测量值之间存在一致的个体内差异,全脊柱视图始终低估了变量的大小。全脊柱视图与颈椎节段侧位X线视图上关键的颈椎矢状位测量值显示出显著的个体内差异。本研究结果证实,全脊柱视图与颈椎节段侧位X线视图提供了不同的颈椎矢状位排列生物力学大小,医疗保健提供者应谨慎使用,因为它们不可互换。我们建议使用LC视图来测量颈椎矢状位排列变量。