Effective lordosis: analysis of sagittal spinal canal alignment in cervical spondylotic myelopathy

Clinical article

View More View Less
  • Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Center for Spine Health, Cleveland, Ohio
Restricted access

Purchase Now

USD  $45.00

Spine - 1 year subscription bundle (Individuals Only)

USD  $369.00

JNS + Pediatrics + Spine - 1 year subscription bundle (Individuals Only)

USD  $600.00
Print or Print + Online

Object

Analysis of cervical sagittal deformity in patients with cervical spondylotic myelopathy (CSM) requires a thorough clinical and radiographic evaluation to select the most appropriate surgical approach. Angular radiographic measurements, which are commonly used to define sagittal deformity, may not be the most appropriate to use for surgical planning. The authors present a simple straight-line method to measure effective spinal canal lordosis and analyze its reliability. Furthermore, comparisons of this measurement to traditional angular measurements of sagittal cervical alignment are made in regards to surgical planning in patients with CSM.

Methods

Twenty preoperative lateral cervical digital radiographs of patients with CSM were analyzed by 3 independent observers on 3 separate occasions using a software measurement program. Sagittal measurements included C2–7 angles utilizing the Cobb and posterior tangent methods, as well as a straight-line method to measure effective spinal canal lordosis from the dorsal-caudal aspect of the C2–7 vertebral bodies. Analysis of variance for repeated measures or Cohen 3-way (kappa) correlation coefficient analysis was performed as appropriate to calculate the intra- and interobserver reliability for each parameter. Discrepancies in angular and effective lordosis measurements were analyzed.

Results

Intra- and interobserver reliability was excellent (intraclass coefficient > 0.75, kappa > 0.90) utilizing all 3 techniques. Four discrepancies between angular and effective lordotic measurements occurred in which images with a lordotic angular measurement did not have lordosis within the ventral spinal canal. These discrepancies were caused by either spondylolisthesis or dorsally projecting osteophytes in all cases.

Conclusions

Although they are reliable, traditional methods used to make angular measurements of sagittal cervical spine alignment do not take into account ventral obstructions to the spinal cord. The effective lordosis measurement method provides a simple and reliable means of determining clinically significant lordosis because it accounts for both overall alignment of the cervical spine as well as impinging structures ventral to the spinal cord. This method should be considered for use in the treatment of patients with CSM.

Abbreviations used in this paper:

CSM = cervical spondylotic myelopathy; ICC = intraclass correlation coefficient.

Spine - 1 year subscription bundle (Individuals Only)

USD  $369.00

JNS + Pediatrics + Spine - 1 year subscription bundle (Individuals Only)

USD  $600.00

Contributor Notes

Address correspondence to: David E. Gwinn, M.D., Cleveland Clinic Foundation, 9500 Euclid Ave/A41, Cleveland, Ohio 44195. email: gwinny13@yahoo.com.
  • 1

    Cobb JR: Outlines for the Study of Scoliosis. Instructional Course Lectures Vol 5:Ann Arbor, Michigan, American Academy of Orthopedic Surgeons, 1948. 261275

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 2

    Dvorak J, , Panjabi MM, , Grob D, , Novotny JE, & Antinnes JA: Clinical validation of functional flexion/extension radiographs of the cervical spine. Spine 18:120127, 1993

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 3

    Farfan HF: Mechanical disorders of the lower back Philadelphia, Lea & Febiger, 1973

  • 4

    Ferguson RJ, & Caplan LR: Cervical spondylotic myelopathy. Neurol Clin 3:373382, 1985

  • 5

    Fleiss JL: The design and analysis of clinical experiments New York, Wiley, 1986

  • 6

    Frobin W, , Leivseth G, , Biggemann M, & Brinckmann P: Sagittal plane segmental motion of the cervical spine. A new precision measurement protocol and normal motion data of healthy adults. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon) 17:2131, 2002

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 7

    Frobin W, , Leivseth G, , Biggemann M, & Brinckmann P: Vertebral height, disk height, posteroanterior displacement and dens-atlas gap in the cervical spine: precision measurement protocol and normal data. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon) 17:423431, 2002

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 8

    Gore DR, , Sepic SB, & Gardner GM: Roentgenographic findings of the cervical spine in asymptomatic people. Spine 11:521524, 1986

  • 9

    Harrison DD, , Cailliet R, , Janik TJ, , Troyanovich SJ, , Harrison DE, & Holland B: Elliptical modeling of the sagittal lumbar lordosis and segmental rotation angles as a method to discriminate between normal an low back pain subjects. J Spinal Disord 11:430439, 1998

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 10

    Harrison DD, , Janik TJ, , Troyanovich SJ, & Holland B: Comparisons of lordotic cervical spine curvatures to a theoretical ideal model of the static sagittal cervical spine. Spine 21:667675, 1996

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 11

    Harrison DE, , Harrison DD, , Cailliet R, , Troyanovich SJ, , Janik TJ, & Holland B: Cobb method of Harrison posterior tangent method: which to choose for lateral cervical radiographic analysis. Spine 25:20722078, 2000

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 12

    Herrmann AM, & Geisler FH: A new computer-aided technique for analysis of lateral cervical radiographs in postoperative patients with degenerative disease. Spine 29:17951803, 2004

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 13

    Ishihara A: [Roentgenographic studies on the normal pattern of the cervical curvature.]. Nippon Seikeigeka Gakkai Zasshi 42:10331044, 1968. Jpn

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 14

    Jackson BL, , Harrison DD, , Robertson GA, & Barker WF: Chiropractic biophysics lateral cervical film analysis reliability. J Manipulative Physiol Ther 16:384391, 1993

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 15

    Jackson R: The cervical syndrome Springfield, Illinois, Charles C. Thomas, 1956

  • 16

    Kaiser JA, & Holland B: Imaging of the cervical spine. Spine 23:27012712, 1998

  • 17

    Kaptain GJ, , Simmons NE, , Replogle RE, & Pobereskin L: Incidence and outcome of kyphotic deformity following laminectomy for cervical spondylotic myelopathy. J Neurosurg 93:2 Suppl 199204, 2000

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 18

    Landis JR, & Koch GG: The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 33:159174, 1977

  • 19

    Morishita Y, , Hida S, , Miyazaki M, , Hong SW, , Zou J, & Wei F, et al. : The effects of the degenerative changes in the functional spinal unit of the kinematics of the cervical spine. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 33:E178E182, 2008

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 20

    Ohara A, , Miyamoto K, , Naganawa T, , Matsumoto K, & Shimizu K: Reliabilities of and correlations among five standard methods of assessing the sagittal alignment of the cervical spine. Spine 31:25852591, 2006

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 21

    Penning L: Normal movements of the cervical spine. AJR Am J Roentgenol 130:317326, 1978

  • 22

    Rao RD, , Gourab K, & David KS: Operative treatment of cervical spondylotic myelopathy. J Bone Joint Surg Am 88:16191640, 2006

  • 23

    Shedid D, & Benzel EC: Cervical spondylosis anatomy: pathophysiology and biomechanics. Neurosurgery 60:1 Suppl S7S13, 2007

  • 24

    Shrout PE, & Fleiss JL: Intraclass correlations: uses in assessing rater reliability. Psychol Bull 86:420428, 1979

  • 25

    Steinmetz MP, , Stewart TJ, , Kager CD, , Benzel EC, & Vaccaro AR: Cervical deformity correction. Neurosurgery 60:1 Suppl S90S97, 2007

  • 26

    Suda K, , Abumi K, , Ito M, , Shono Y, , Kaneda K, & Fujiya M: Local kyphosis reduces surgical outcomes of expansive opendoor laminoplasty for cervical spondylotic myelopathy. Spine 28:12581262, 2003

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 27

    Suk KS, , Kim KT, , Lee JH, , Lee SH, , Lim YJ, & Kim JS: Sagittal alignment of the cervical spine after the laminoplasty. Spine 32:E656E660, 2007

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 28

    Yaszemski MJ, , White AA, & Panjabi MM, Biomechanics of the spine. Fardon DF, & Garfin SR: Orthopedic Knowledge Update Chicago, Illinois, American Academy of Orthopedic Surgeons Press, 2002. 1522

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

Metrics

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 528 165 23
Full Text Views 105 14 0
PDF Downloads 98 11 0
EPUB Downloads 0 0 0