ArticleKorean journal of anesthesiology2022
Comparison between the coronal diameters of the cervical spinal canal and spinal cord measured using computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging in Korean patients.
Article in Korean journal of anesthesiology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Determination of the Most Suitable Cut-Off Point of the Cervical Foraminal Cross-Sectional Area at the C5/6 Level to Predict Cervical Foraminal Bony Stenosis.Tomography (Ann Arbor, Mich.) · 2025Article
- An active electronic, high-density epidural paddle array for chronic spinal cord neuromodulation.Journal of neural engineering · 2025Article
- Response to "Comment on Comparison between the coronal diameters of the cervical spinal canal and spinal cord measured using computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging in Korean patients".Korean journal of anesthesiology · 2023Article
- Comment on "Comparison between the coronal diameters of the cervical spinal canal and spinal cord measured using computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging in Korean patients".Korean journal of anesthesiology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIf the proportion of the spinal cord in the epidural space can be determined under C-arm fluoroscopy during cervical epidural block, a safe entry point for the epidural needle can be established. The aim of this study was the measurement of the cord to canal transverse diameter ratio of each cervical spines.
methodsWe retrospectively evaluated the imaging data of 100 patients who underwent both cervical computed tomography (CT) and cervical magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) at our hospital. We measured the diameters of the spinal canal and spinal cord from the 3rd cervical vertebra to the 1st thoracic vertebra (T1) at each level by using the patients' cervical CT and MRI images. The spinal cord and spinal canal diameters were measured in the transverse plane of the cervical MRI and CT images, respectively.
resultsThe spinal cord to spinal canal diameter ratio was the highest at the 4th and 5th cervical vertebrae (0.64 ± 0.07) and the lowest at T1 (0.55 ± 0.06, 99% CI [0.535, 0.565].
conclusionsOur findings suggest that the cord to canal transverse diameter ratio could be used as a reference to reduce direct spinal cord injuries during cervical epidural block under C-arm fluoroscopy. In the C-arm fluoroscopic image, if an imaginary line connecting the left and right innermost lines of the pedicles of T1 is drawn and if the needle is inserted into the outer one-fifth of the left and right sides, the risk of puncturing the spinal cord would be relatively reduced.
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.