ArticleGlobal spine journal2025
Anatomic Assessment of L1-S1 Neuroforaminal Dimensions Using Computed Tomography in 1,000 Patients: A Follow-Up Study.
Article in Global spine journal, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- A CT-based radiographic analysis of parameters of congenital lumbar neuroforaminal stenosis.Journal of spine surgery (Hong Kong) · 2025Article
- 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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesWhile the radiographic criteria for diagnosing central lumbar stenosis are well described, criteria for diagnosing neuroforaminal stenosis (NFS) are unclear. Prior research has utilized magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to characterize neuroforaminal dimensions (NFDs). However, this approach has inherent limitations that can adversely impact measurement accuracy. Existing literature on the use of computed tomography (CT) to investigate normal NFDs is limited. The purpose of the present study was to describe normal lumbar NFDs that would aid in the establishment of objective quantitative criteria for the diagnosis of NFS.
methodsThis study evaluated CT imaging of 494 female and 506 male subjects between 18 and 35 years of age to determine normal NFDs, specifically the sagittal anteroposterior width, craniocaudal height, and area. Statistical analyses were performed to assess differences in NFDs according to variables including sex, height, weight, body mass index, and ethnicity.
resultsWithout differentiating between sides or disc levels, mean NFDs were 8.71 mm for sagittal anteroposterior width, 17.73 mm for craniocaudal height, and 133.26 mm
conclusionsThe present study describes normal lumbar NFDs in young, healthy patients. NFDs were influenced by sex and ethnicity but not by anthropometric factors.
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.