A comparison of three methods for measuring thoracic kyphosis: Implications for clinical studies

Rheumatology

Volumn 39, Issue 3, 2000, Pages 310-315

  Goh, S ^a   Price, R I ^b   Leedman, P J ^a   Singer, K P ^a,c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA   (Australia)

^b SIR CHARLES GAIRDNER HOSPITAL   (Australia)

^c ROYAL PERTH HOSPITAL   (Australia)

Author keywords

Cobb angle; Computer assisted measurement; Intervertebral disc; Kyphosis; Spinal curvature; Thoracic spine; Vertebral body

Indexed keywords

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CADAVER; COMPUTER ANALYSIS; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; CONTROLLED STUDY; FEMALE; HUMAN; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; KYPHOSIS; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MEASUREMENT; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; SPINE RADIOGRAPHY; THORACIC SPINE; VERTEBRA BODY;

EID: 0034078406     PISSN: 14620324     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/rheumatology/39.3.310     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Bot S, Caspers M, Van Royen B, Toussaint H, Kingma I. Biomechanical analysis of posture in patients with spinal kyphosis due to ankylosing spondylitis: A pilot study. Rheumatology 1999;38:441-3.
2. De Smet AA, Robinson RG, Johnson BE, Lukert BP. Spinal compression fractures in osteoporotic women: Patterns and relationship to hyperkyphosis. Radiology 1988;166:497-500.
3. Murray P, Weinstein S, Spratt K. The natural history and long-term follow-up of Scheuermann kyphosis. J Bone Joint Surg 1993;75A:236-48.
4. McAlister WH, Shackelford GD. Measurement of spinal curvatures. Radiol Clin North Am 1975;13:113-21.
5. Singer KP, Jones TJ, Breidahl PD. A comparison of radiographic and computer-assisted measurements of thoracic and thoracolumbar sagittal curvature. Skeletal Radiol 1990;19:21-6.
6. Oda M, Rauh S, Gregory PB, Silverman FN, Bleck EE. The significance of roentgenographic measurement in scoliosis. J Paediatr Orthop 1982;2:378-82.
7. Dutton KE, Jones TJ, Slinger BS, Scull ER, O'Connor J. Reliability of the Cobb angle index derived by traditional and computer assisted methods. Australas Phys Eng Sci Med 1989;12:16-23.
8. Jeffries BF, Tarlton M, DeSmet AA, Dwyer SJ, Brower AC. Computerized measurement and analysis of scoliosis. A more accurate representation of the shape of the curve. Radiology 1980;134:381-5.
9. Stokes IAF, Bigalow LC, Moreland MS. Three-dimensional spinal curvature in idiopathic scoliosis. J Orthop Res 1987;5:102-13.
10. Milne JS, Lauder IJ. Age effects in kyphosis and lordosis in adults. Ann Hum Biol 1974;1:327-37.
11. Voutsinas SA, MacEwen GD. Sagittal profiles of the spine. Clin Orthop 1986;210:235-42.
12. Turner-Smith AR, Thomas DC. Some relationships between the spine and skin surface shape. In: Stokes IAF, Pekelsky P, Moreland M, eds. Surface topography and spinal deformity. Stuttgart: Gustav Fischer, 1987:3-11.
13. Carman DL, Browne RH, Birch JG. Measurement of scoliosis and kyphosis radiographs. Intraobserver and interobserver variation. J Bone Joint Surg 1990;72A: 328-33.
14. Shea KG, Stevens PM, Nelson M, Smith JT, Masters KS, Yandrow S. A comparison of manual versus computer-assisted radiographic measurement. Spine 1998;23:551-5.
15. Goldberg MS, Poitras B, Mayo NE, Labelle H, Bourassa R, Cloutier R. Observer variation in assessing spinal curvature and skeletal development in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Spine 1988;13:1371-7.
16. Singer KP, Edmondston SJ, Day RE, Breidahl WH. Computer-assisted curvature assessment and Cobb angle determination of the thoracic kyphosis: An in-vivo and in-vitro comparison. Spine 1994;19:1381-4.
17. Manns RA, Haddaway MJ, McCall IW, Cassar Pullicino V, Davie MWJ. The relative contribution of disc and vertebral morphometry to the angle of kyphosis in asymptomatic subjects. Clin Radiol 1996;51:258-62.
18. Hedlund LR, Gallagher JC, Meeger C, Stoner S. Change in vertebral shape in spinal osteoporosis. Calcif Tissue Int 1989;44:168-72.
19. Melton LJ, Lane AW, Cooper C, Eastell R, O'Fallon WM, Riggs BL. Prevalence and incidence of vertebral deformities. Osteoporos Int 1993;3:113-9.
20. Burger H, Van Daele PLA, Grashuis K et al. Vertebral deformities and functional impairment in men and women. J Bone Miner Res 1997;12:152-7.
21. Panjabi MM, Takata K, Goel V et al. Thoracic human vertebrae. Quantitative three-dimensional anatomy. Spine 1991;16:888-901.
22. Edmondston SJ, Singer KP, Price RI, Day RE, Breidahl PD. The relationship between bone mineral density, vertebral body shape and spinal curvature in the elderly thoracolumbar spine: An in vitro study. Br J Radiol 1994;67:969-75.
23. Edmondston SJ, Singer KP, Day RE, Price RI, Breidahl PD. Ex vivo estimation of thoracolumbar vertebral body compressive strength: The relative contributions of bone densitometry and vertebral morphometry. Osteoporos Int 1997;7:142-8.
24. Goh S. Price R, Leedman P, Singer K. The relative influence of vertebral body and intervertebral disc shape on thoracic kyphosis. Clin Biomech 1999;14:439-48.
25. Genant HK, Jergas M. Palermo L et al. Comparison of scmiquantitative visual and quantitative morphometric assessment of prevalent and incident vertebral fractures in osteoporosis. J Bone Miner Res 1996;11:984-96.
26. Portney LG, Watkins MP. Foundations of clinical research. Applications to practice. Connecticut: Appleton and Lange, 1993.
27. Milne JS, Lauder IJ. The relationship of kyphosis to the shape of the vertebral bodies. Ann Hum Biol 1976;3:173-9.
28. Schmorl G, Junghanns H. The human spine in health and disease. New York: Grune & Stratton, 1971.