ArticleMedicine2015
The Lumbar Spine as a Dynamic Structure Depicted in Upright MRI.
Article in Medicine, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 23 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evaluation of spinal canal and neural foramen areas in supine and prone positions in patients with lumbar stenosis.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2026Article
- Article
- The prevalence of redundant nerve roots in standing positional MRI decreases by half in supine and almost to zero in flexed seated position: a retrospective cross-sectional cohort study.Neuroradiology · 2022Article
- Subcutaneous Fat Thickness on Erect Radiographs Is a Predictor of Infection Following Elective Posterior Lumbar Fusion.International journal of spine surgery · 2022Article
- Axial Loading during MRI Induces Lumbar Foraminal Area Changes and Has the Potential to Improve Diagnostics of Nerve Root Compromise.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Article
- Development of Upright Computed Tomography With Area Detector for Whole-Body Scans: Phantom Study, Efficacy on Workflow, Effect of Gravity on Human Body, and Potential Clinical Impact.Investigative radiology · 2020Article
- The influence of knee bolster on lumbar spinal stenosis parameters on MR images.Skeletal radiology · 2020Article
- Correlation of listhesis on upright radiographs and central lumbar spinal canal stenosis on supine MRI: is it possible to predict lumbar spinal canal stenosis?Skeletal radiology · 2018Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Spinal canal stenosis is a dynamic phenomenon that becomes apparent during spinal loading. Current diagnostic procedures have considerable short comings in diagnosing the disease to full extend, as they are performed in supine situation. Upright MRI imaging might overcome this diagnostic gap.This study investigated the lumbar neuroforamenal diameter, spinal canal diameter, vertebral body translation, and vertebral body angles in 3 different body positions using upright MRI imaging.Fifteen subjects were enrolled in this study. A dynamic MRI in 3 different body positions (at 0° supine, 80° upright, and 80° upright + hyperlordosis posture) was taken using a 0.25 T open-configuration scanner equipped with a rotatable examination bed allowing a true standing MRI.The mean diameter of the neuroforamen at L5/S1 in 0° position was 8.4 mm on the right and 8.8 mm on the left, in 80° position 7.3 mm on the right and 7.2 mm on the left, and in 80° position with hyperlordosis 6.6 mm (P < 0.05) on the right and 6.1 mm on the left (P < 0.001).The mean area of the neuroforamen at L5/S1 in 0° position was 103.5 mm on the right and 105.0 mm on the left, in 80° position 92.5 mm on the right and 94.8 mm on the left, and in 80° position with hyperlordosis 81.9 mm on the right and 90.2 mm on the left.The mean volume of the spinal canal at the L5/S1 level in 0° position was 9770 mm, in 80° position 10600 mm, and in 80° position with hyperlordosis 9414 mm.The mean intervertebral translation at level L5/S1 was 8.3 mm in 0° position, 9.9 mm in 80° position, and 10.1 mm in the 80° position with hyperlordosis.The lordosis angle at level L5/S1 was 49.4° in 0° position, 55.8° in 80° position, and 64.7 mm in the 80° position with hyperlordosis.Spinal canal stenosis is subject to a dynamic process, that can be displayed in upright MRI imaging. The range of anomalies is clinically relevant and dynamic positioning of the patient during MRI can provide essential diagnostic information which are not attainable with other methods.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.