Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28343254›Full record

ArticleSurgical and radiologic anatomy : SRA2017

Dynamic measurements of cervical neural foramina during neck movements in asymptomatic young volunteers.

Victor Chang, Azam Basheer, Timothy Baumer, Daniel Oravec, Colin P McDonald, Michael J Bey, Stephen Bartol, Yener N Yeni

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Surgical and radiologic anatomy : SRA, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 21% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Spurling's test - inconsistencies in clinical practice.The Journal of manual & manipulative therapy · 2021
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.

Victor ChangDepartment of Neurosurgery, Henry Ford Hospital, K-11, 2799W. Grand Blvd, Detroit, MI, USA. vchang1@hfhs.org.
Azam BasheerDepartment of Neurosurgery, Henry Ford Hospital, K-11, 2799W. Grand Blvd, Detroit, MI, USA.
Timothy BaumerDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Henry Ford Hospital, Detroit, MI, USA.
Daniel OravecDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Henry Ford Hospital, Detroit, MI, USA.
Colin P McDonaldDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Henry Ford Hospital, Detroit, MI, USA.
Michael J BeyDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Henry Ford Hospital, Detroit, MI, USA.
Stephen BartolDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Henry Ford Hospital, Detroit, MI, USA.
Yener N YeniDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Henry Ford Hospital, Detroit, MI, USA.
Henry Ford Hospital · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeNeural foraminal dimensions are considered important in nerve root compression and development of cervical radiculopathy, but baseline data regarding their range during normal motion are not available. An in vivo study of cervical foraminal motion was conducted to characterize normal 3D dynamic foraminal dimensions during physiological neck motion and compare between different tasks and intervertebral segments.

methodsBiplane X-ray imaging and computed tomography-based markerless tracking were used to measure foraminal height (FH) and width (FW) from five asymptomatic subjects during neck axial rotation and extension. FH and FW were quantified as the minimum (SI.Min and AP.Min), range (SI.Range and AP.Range), and median (SI.Med and AP.Med) of superoinferior (SI) and anteroposterior (AP) dimensions for each trial and as the coefficient of variation of these variables from three trials (SI.Med.CV and AP.Med.CV, SI.Range.CV and AP.Range.CV) at C3-4 through C6-7 levels for each subject. Differences were analyzed using mixed model ANOVA.

resultsAP.Range and AP.Med.CV were greater (P < 0.0001) while AP.Min and AP.Range.CV were smaller (P < 0.0006 and P < 0.0005) during neck extension than rotation. SI.Range and SI.Med.CV were greater for extension than rotation at C5-6 (P < 0.002 and P < 0.03), whereas SI.Med.CV was greater for rotation than extension at C3-4 (P < 0.03). AP.Range (P < 0.02), AP.Med.CV (P < 0.05), SI.Range (P < 0.0004), and SI.Med.CV (P < 0.02) were different between cervical levels, the latter two being during extension only.

conclusionsPatterns of FH and FW during normal motion are different between tasks and cervical levels. These findings are expected to provide a basis for future studies of spinal degeneration and surgical efficacy.

Indexed as

AdultCervical VertebraeFemaleHealthy VolunteersHumansMaleMovementRadiographic Image Interpretation, Computer-AssistedRange of Motion, ArticularRotationTomography, X-Ray ComputedZygapophyseal JointCervical spineDynamic X-rayMotion analysisNeck extensionNeck rotationNeural foramen

Identifiers

PMID28343254
OpenAlexW2598727283

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.