ArticleSurgical and radiologic anatomy : SRA2018
Dimensions of the spinous process and interspinous space: a morphometric study.
Article in Surgical and radiologic anatomy : SRA, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Navigation-assisted unilateral biportal endoscopic decompression using a 0-degree endoscope for upper lumbar spinal stenosis: a technical note on facet preservation.Journal of spine surgery (Hong Kong) · 2026Article
- Research Progress on the Posterior Midline Lumbar Spinous Process-Splitting Approach.Orthopaedic surgery · 2025Review
- The effect of lifting load on the kinematic characteristics of lumbar spinous process in vivo.Surgical and radiologic anatomy : SRA · 2023Article
- Variations of spinous and transverse process length in the human lumbar spine.The Journal of manual & manipulative therapy · 2023Article
- A Radiological Evaluation of Lumbar Spinous Processes and Interspinous Spaces, Including Clinical Implications.Cureus · 2021Article
- Spinous Process Inclination in Degenerative Lumbar Spinal Stenosis Individuals.BioMed research international · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo measure the morphological dimensions of the spinous process (SP) and interspinous space, and provide a basis for the development of interspinous devices for the Korean or East Asian populations.
methodsWe retrospectively analyzed the anatomical parameters of 120 patients. The parameters included height, length, and width of SP, interspinous distance (supine, standing, and dynamic), cortical thickness of SP, and spino-laminar (S-L) angle. Correlations between measurements, age, and gender were investigated.
resultsThe largest height, length, and cortical thickness and S-L angle were noted at L3. The largest width was observed at S1. The interspinous distance decreased significantly from L2-3 to L5-S1 and was significantly larger in the supine than in standing posture for L5-S1. Cortical thickness was gradually tapered from the anterior to the posterior position. The S-L angle at L2 and L3 was similar and significantly decreased from L3 to S1. An increased trend in width with aging and a decreased trend in distance (supine) were noted. A significant increase in height, length, and distance in males compared with females was also observed.
conclusionsThe interspinous space is wider at the anterior, and the cortex is thicker anteriorly. Accordingly, it appears that the optimized implant position lies in the interspinous space anteriorly. The varying interspinous space with different postures and gradually narrowing with age suggest the need for caution when sizing the device. Gender differences also need to be considered when designing implantable devices.
Indexed as
Identifiers
30182307What 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.