Clinical usefulness of CT-myelogram comparing with the MRI in degenerative cervical spinal disorders: Is CTM still useful for primary diagnostic tool?

Journal of Spinal Disorders and Techniques

Volumn 22, Issue 5, 2009, Pages 353-357

  Song, Kyung Jin ^a   Choi, Byung Wan ^b   Kim, Gyu Hyung ^a   Kim, Jung Ryul ^a  

^a Chonbuk National University Medical School   (South Korea)

^b Gwangju Veterans Hospital   (South Korea)

Author keywords

CTM; Degenerative cervical spine disease; Interobserver and intraobserver agreement; MRI

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ANTERIOR SPINE FUSION; ARTICLE; CLINICAL ARTICLE; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIAGNOSTIC VALUE; DISEASE SEVERITY; FEMALE; HUMAN; IMAGE ANALYSIS; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; INTERVERTEBRAL DISK HERNIA; INTERVERTEBRAL DISKECTOMY; MALE; NERVE ROOT COMPRESSION; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RADICULOPATHY; SPINAL CORD DISEASE; SPINAL FORAMINAL STENOSIS; SPINE DISEASE; SPINE RADIOGRAPHY; VERTEBRAL CANAL STENOSIS;

ADULT; AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; CERVICAL VERTEBRAE; FEMALE; HUMANS; INTERVERTEBRAL DISK DISPLACEMENT; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MYELOGRAPHY; OBSERVER VARIATION; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT (HEALTH CARE); PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS; RADICULOPATHY; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; SPINAL CORD COMPRESSION; SPINAL FUSION; SPONDYLOSIS; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 68049084750     PISSN: 15360652     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/BSD.0b013e31817df78e     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. Bernhardt M, Hynes RA, Blume HW, et al. Cervical spondylotic myelopathy. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1993;75:119-128.
2. Bohlman HH, Emery SE. The pathophysiology of cervical spondylosis and myelopathy. Spine. 1988;13:843-846.
3. Bartlett RJ, Hill CA, Devlin R, et al. Two-dimensional MRI at 1.5 and 0.5 T versus CT myelography in the diagnosis of cervical radiculopathy. Neuroradiology. 1996;38:142-147.
4. Bartlett RJ, Hill CR, Gardiner E. A comparison of T2 and gadolinium enhanced MRI with CT myelography in cervical radiculopathy. Br J Radiol. 1998;71:11-19.
5. Breidahl WH, Low V, Khangure MS. Imaging the cervical spine: A comparison of MR with myelography and CT myelography. Australas Radiol. 1991;35:306-314.
6. Dorenbeck U, Schreyer AG, Schlaier J. Degenerative diseases of the cervical spine: comparison of a multiecho data image combination sequence with a magnetization transfer saturation pulse and cervical myelography and CT. Neuroradiology. 2004;46:306-309.
7. Larsson EM, Holtas S, Cronqvist M, et al. Comparison of myelography, CT myelography and magnetic resonance imaging in cervical spondylosis and disk herniation pre-and postoperative findings. Acta Radiol. 1989;30:233-239.
8. Modic MT, Masaryk TJ, Mulopulos GP. Cervical radiculopathy: prospective evaluation with surface coil MR imaging, CT with metrizamide, and metrizamide myelography. Neuroradiology. 1986;161:753-759.
9. Reul J, Gievers B, Weis J, et al. Assessment of the narrow cervical spinal canal: a prospective comparison of MRI, myelography and CT-myelography. Neuroradiology. 1995;37:187-191.
10. Stafira JS, Sonnad JR, Yuh WT. Qualitative assessment of cervical spinal stenosis: observer variability on CT and MR images. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2003;24:766-769.
11. Henriksen M, Lund H, Moe-Nilssen R, et al. Test-retest reliability of trunk accelerometric gait analysis. Gait Posture. 2004;19:288-297.
12. Lin LK. A concordance correlation coefficient to evaluate reproducibility. Biometrics. 1989;45:255-268.
13. Modic MT, Ross JS, Masaryk TJ. Imaging of degenerative disease of the cervical spine. Clin Orthop. 1989;239:109-120.
14. Badami JP, Norman D, Barbaro NM. Metrizamide CT myelography in cervical myelopathy and radiculopathy. Correlation with conventional myelography and surgical findings. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1985;144:675-680.
15. Giuseppe S, Giussppe S, Sandra P. Myelopathy and radiculopathy due to cervical spondylosis: Myelographic-CT correlations. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 1983;4:601-603.
16. Czervionke LF, Daniels DL, Wehrli FW. Magnetic susceptibility artifacts in gradient-recalled echo MR imaging. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 1988;9:1149-1155.
17. Shafaie FF, Wippold FJ II, Gado M, et al. Comparison of computed tomography myelography and magnetic resonance imaging in the evaluation of cervical spondylotic myelopathy and radiculopathy. Spine. 1999;24:1781-1785.
18. Penning L, Wilmink JT, van Woerden HH, et al. CT myelographic findings in degenerative disorders of the cervical spine: clinical significance. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1986;146:793-801.
19. Karnaze MG, Grado MH, Sartor KJ, et al. Comparison of MR and CT myelography in imaging the cervical and thoracic spine. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1988;150:397-403.
20. Hesselink JR. Spine imaging: history, achievements, remaining frontiers. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1988;140:1223-1229.