Evaluating the differences between 1D, 2D, and 3D occupying ratios in reflecting the JOA score in cervical ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament.
Japanese Orthopedic Association score
Ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament (OPLL)
location type
occupying ratio
three-dimensional measurement
Journal
Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery
ISSN: 2223-4292
Titre abrégé: Quant Imaging Med Surg
Pays: China
ID NLM: 101577942
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Jun 2019
Jun 2019
Historique:
entrez:
2
8
2019
pubmed:
2
8
2019
medline:
2
8
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
To compare the differences between the one-dimensional (1D) length, two-dimensional (2D) area, and three-dimensional (3D) volume occupying ratios, and to assess the difference between the central and peripheral types of ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament (OPLL). In total, 60 patients were included in this study, and 1D and 2D occupying ratios were obtained using Centricity PACS (GE Healthcare), while a 3D model was created using MIMICS The 1D, 2D, and 3D occupying ratios had a significantly negative relationship with JOA score (r=-0.503; -0.506; -0.516, respectively). There was little difference in the JOA score between the central and peripheral types (17.15 There was no difference between 1D, 2D, and 3D occupying ratios in reflecting the JOA score in cervical OPLL. Also, it is sufficient to reflect the occupying ratio in the clinical outcome without distinguishing between central and peripheral type.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
To compare the differences between the one-dimensional (1D) length, two-dimensional (2D) area, and three-dimensional (3D) volume occupying ratios, and to assess the difference between the central and peripheral types of ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament (OPLL).
METHODS
METHODS
In total, 60 patients were included in this study, and 1D and 2D occupying ratios were obtained using Centricity PACS (GE Healthcare), while a 3D model was created using MIMICS
RESULTS
RESULTS
The 1D, 2D, and 3D occupying ratios had a significantly negative relationship with JOA score (r=-0.503; -0.506; -0.516, respectively). There was little difference in the JOA score between the central and peripheral types (17.15
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
There was no difference between 1D, 2D, and 3D occupying ratios in reflecting the JOA score in cervical OPLL. Also, it is sufficient to reflect the occupying ratio in the clinical outcome without distinguishing between central and peripheral type.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31367549
doi: 10.21037/qims.2019.05.26
pii: qims-09-06-952
pmc: PMC6629567
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
952-959Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Conflicts of Interest: The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.
Références
J Neurosurg. 2002 Mar;96(2 Suppl):168-72
pubmed: 12450279
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2007 Mar 15;32(6):647-53
pubmed: 17413469
Neurosurg Focus. 2011 Mar;30(3):E6
pubmed: 21434822
Spine J. 2011 Oct;11(10):927-32
pubmed: 21925953
Eur Spine J. 2013 May;22(5):1152-7
pubmed: 23291855
Eur Spine J. 2013 Jul;22(7):1480-8
pubmed: 23404355
Eur Spine J. 2013 Nov;22(11):2569-74
pubmed: 24000076
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2014 Jan 1;39(1):58-67
pubmed: 24108293
J Spinal Cord Med. 2015 Sep;38(5):593-8
pubmed: 24964955
Spine J. 2015 May 1;15(5):875-84
pubmed: 25637468
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2015 Jun 15;40(12):E675-93
pubmed: 25839387
Korean J Spine. 2012 Sep;9(3):205-8
pubmed: 25983816
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2015 Oct 1;40(19):1479-86
pubmed: 26208225
Korean J Spine. 2015 Dec;12(4):261-6
pubmed: 26834814
Int Orthop. 2018 Apr;42(4):835-842
pubmed: 29067483
J Spine Surg. 2017 Dec;3(4):650-656
pubmed: 29354744
Spine J. 2018 Oct;18(10):1779-1786
pubmed: 29526640
World Neurosurg. 2018 Jul;115:e172-e177
pubmed: 29649650
Neurospine. 2018 Mar;15(1):33-41
pubmed: 29656627
Neurospine. 2018 Mar;15(1):91-100
pubmed: 29656629
Neurospine. 2018 Sep;15(3):242-248
pubmed: 30126266