ArticleJournal of craniovertebral junction & spine
Assessment of posterior odontoid tilt: Think scoliosis.
Article in Journal of craniovertebral junction & spine. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: The odontoid process is an important anatomical structure providing a balance of mobility and stability at the craniocervical junction, with structural and biomechanical associations, and morphology that can be quantified with various measurements. The odontoid tilt angle is a measurement that must be accurately performed and can guide further investigations. Materials and Methods: Retrospective analysis of 100 cervical spinal magnetic resonance imaging was performed on patients investigated for neck pain, with a known history of scoliosis, and compared with 50 control patients. Posterior odontoid tilt and Cobb angles were measured by a musculoskeletal radiology fellow and a fellowship-trained musculoskeletal radiologist with more than 10 years of experience, with descriptive statistics then performed on the measurements. Results: One hundred and thirty-two patients met the inclusion criteria, across both the scoliosis and control groups. 9 (18%) patients from the control group demonstrated posterior odontoid tilt, compared with 35 (43%) of patients in the scoliosis group. A range of scoliosis curve morphologies were demonstrated: 62 thoracolumbar, 10 thoracic, 9 lumbar, and 1 cervicothoracic, with average Cobb angles of 24.3°, 26.9°, 23.4, and 54°, respectively. There was good interobserver agreement for both measurements and a statistically significant difference in the posterior odontoid tilt measurements between groups (99% confidence interval, Conclusion: We recommend opportunistically assessing for the posterior odontoid tilt (Leaning odontoid tower of BRUMES (Botchu; Raja Rasul; Uldin; Morgan;Elias; Sonal, Shashank, Shirodkar). In cases with a posterior tilt angle >5°, we recommend whole spine imaging to assess for scoliosis in the thoracolumbar spine.
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.