The reproducibility of quantitative measurements in lumbar magnetic resonance imaging of children from the general population

Spine

Volumn 33, Issue 19, 2008, Pages 2094-2100

  Masharawi, Y ^a   Kjaer, P ^b   Bendix, T ^c   Manniche, C ^b   Wedderkopp, N ^b   Sorensen, J S ^b   Peled, N ^d   Jensen, T S ^b  

^a TEL AVIV UNIVERSITY   (Israel)

^b Back Center Funen   (Denmark)

^c UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN DENMARK   (Denmark)

^d Hacarmel Medical Center   (Israel)

Author keywords

Immature spine; Limits of agreements; Lumbar MRI; Reproducibility

Indexed keywords

ADOLESCENT; ANATOMICAL VARIATION; ARTICLE; CHILD; CLINICAL EVALUATION; CONTROLLED STUDY; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; FEMALE; HUMAN; INTERVERTEBRAL DISK; LORDOSIS; LUMBAR SPINE; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; POPULATION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS; REPRODUCIBILITY; SCHOOL CHILD; VERTEBRA BODY; HISTOLOGY; LUMBAR VERTEBRA; OBSERVER VARIATION;

ADOLESCENT; CHILD; FEMALE; HUMANS; LUMBAR VERTEBRAE; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MALE; OBSERVER VARIATION; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS;

EID: 55449112425     PISSN: 03622436     EISSN: 15281159     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e31817f19f7     Document Type: Article

References (36)

1. Masharawi Y, Rothschild B, Dar G, et al. Facet orientation in the thoracolumbar spine: three-dimensional anatomic and biomechanical analysis. Spine 2004;29:1755-63.
2. Masharawi Y, Rothschild B, Salame K, et al. Facet tropism and interfacet shape in the thoracolumbar vertebrae: characterization and biomechanical interpretation. Spine 2005;30:E281-E292.
3. Masharawi Y, Salame K, Mirovsky Y, et al. Vertebral body shape variation in the thoracic and lumbar spine: characterization of its asymmetry and wedging. Clin Anat 2008;21:46-54.
4. Panjabi MM, Takata K, Goel V, et al. Thoracic human vertebrae. Quantitative three-dimensional anatomy. Spine 1991;16:888-901.
5. Panjabi MM, Goel V, Oxland T, et al. Lumbar human vertebrae. Quantitative three-dimensional anatomy. Spine 1992;17:299-306.
6. Parent S, Labelle H, Skalli W, et al. Morphometric analysis of anatomic scoliotic specimens. Spine 2002;27:2305-11.
7. Parent S, Labelle H, Skalli W, et al. Thoracic pedicle morphometry in vertebrae from scoliotic spines. Spine 2004;29:239-48.
8. Peleg S, Dar G, Steinberg N, et al. Sacral orientation revisited. Spine 2007; 32:E397-E404.
9. Scoles PV, Linton AE, Latimer B, et al. Vertebral body and posterior element morphology: the normal spine in middle life. Spine 1988;13:1082-6.
10. Tan SH, Teo EC, Chua HC. Quantitative three-dimensional anatomy of cervical, thoracic and lumbar vertebrae of Chinese Singaporeans. Eur Spine J 2004;13:137-46.
11. Berlemann U, Jeszenszky DJ, Biihler DW, et al. The role of lumbar lordosis, vertebral end-plate inclination, disc height, and facet orientation in degenerative spondylolisthesis.J Spinal Disord 1999;12:68-73.
12. Boden S, Riew KD, Yamaguchi K, et al. Orientation of the lumbar facet joints: association with degenerative disc disease. J Bone Joint Am1996;78: 403-11.
13. Cyteval C, Thomas E, Picot MC, et al. Normal vertebral body dimensions: a new measurement using MRI. Osteoporos Int 2002;13:468-73.
14. Jamali AA, Deuel C, Perreira A, et al. Linear and angular measurements of computer-generated models: are they accurate, valid, and reliable? Comput Aided Surg 2007;12:278-85.
15. Li Xu G, Haughton VM, Carrera GF. Lumbar facet joint capsule: appearance at MR imaging and CT. Radiology 1990;177:415-20.
16. Mac-Thiong JM, Pinel-Giroux FM, de Guise JA, et al. Comparison between constrained and non-constrained Cobb techniques for the assessment of thoracic kyphosis and lumbar lordosis. Eur Spine J 2007; 16:1325-31.
17. Violas P, Estivalezes E, Pedrono A, et al. A method to investigate interverte-bral disc morphology from MRI in early idiopathic scoliosis: a preliminary evaluation in a group of 14 patients. Magn Reson Imaging 2005;23:475-79.
18. Masharawi YM, Alperovitch-Najenson D, Dar G, et al. Lumbar facet orientation in spondylolysis: a skeletal study. Spine 2007;32:E176-E180.
19. Masharawi Y, Dar G, Peleg S, et al. Lumbar facet anatomy changes in spondylolysis: a comparative skeletal study. Eur Spine J 2007;16:993-9.
20. Ward C, Latimer B. Human evolution and the development of spondylolysis. Spine 2005;30:1808-14.
21. Ward CV, Latimer B, Alander DH, et al. Radiographic assessment of lumbar facet distance spacing and spondylolysis. Spine 2007;32:E85-E88.
22. Jensen TS, Sorensen JS, Kjaer P. Intra- and interobserver reproducibility of vertebral endplate signal (modic) changes in the lumbar spine: the Nordic Modic Consensus Group classification. Acta Radiol 2007;48:748-54.
23. Braga-Baiak A, Shah A, Pietrobon R, et al. Intra- and inter-observer reliability of MRI examination of intervertebral disc abnormalities in patients with cervical myelopathy. Eur J Radiol 2008;65:91-8.
24. Cihangiroglu M, Yildirim H, Bozgeyyik Z, et al. Observer variability based on the strength of MR scanners in the assessment of lumbar degenerative disc disease. EurJ Radiol 2004;15:202-8.
25. Mulconrey DS, Knight RQ, Bramble JD, et al. Interobserver reliability in the interpretation of diagnostic lumbar MRI and nuclear imaging. Spine J 2006; 6:177-84.
26. Sorensen JS, Kjaer P, Jensen TS, et al. Low-field magnetic resonance imaging of the lumbar spine: reliability of qualitative evaluation of disc and muscle parameters. Acta Radiol 2006;47:947-53.
27. Masci L, Pike J, Malara F, et al. Use of the one-legged hyperextension test and magnetic resonance imaging in the diagnosis of active spondylolysis. Br J Sports Med 2006;40:940-6.
28. Kjaer P, Leboeuf-Yde C, Sorensen JS, et al. An epidemiologic study of MRI and low back pain in 13-year-old children. Spine 2005;30:798-806.
29. Lin LI. A concordance correlation coefficient to evaluate reproducibility. Biometrics 1989;45:255-68.
30. Nickerson CA. A note on "a concordance correlation coefficient to evaluate reproducibility." Biometrics 1997;53:1503-8.
31. Bland JM, Altman DG. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1986;l:307-10.
32. Portney LG, Watkins MP. Foundations of Clinical Research: Application to Practice. 2nd ed. East Norwalk, CT: Appleton Lange; 2000: 53-67.
33. Knirsch W, Kurtz C, Häffner N, et al. Normal values of the sagittal diameter of the lumbar spine (vertebral body and dural sac) in children measured by MRI. Pediatr Radiol 2005;35:419-24.
34. Cheung J, Wever DJ, Veldhuizen AG, et al. The reliability of quantitative analysis on digital images of the scoliotic spine. Eur Spine J 2002;11:535-42.
35. Andreasen ML, Langhoff L, Jensen TS, et al. Reproduction of the lumbar lordosis: a comparison of standing radiographs versus supine magnetic resonance imaging obtained with straightened lower extremities. J Manipulative Physiol Ther 2007;30:26-30.
36. Taylor JR. Scoliosis and growth. Patterns of asymmetry in normal vertebral growth. Acta Orthop Scand 1983;54:596-602.