ArticleSurgical and radiologic anatomy : SRA2026
Anatomic parameters for diagnosing congenital cervical stenosis via computed tomography.
Article in Surgical and radiologic anatomy : SRA, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Clinical implications of distribution-based CT thresholds in congenital cervical stenosis.Surgical and radiologic anatomy : SRA · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
18 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo establish parameters for congenital cervical stenosis (CCS) using computed tomography (CT), assessing influences of patient sex, race, and ethnicity.
methodsMeasurements were collected of anteroposterior diameter (APD), interpedicular distance (IPD) and cervical intervertebral foramen dimensions (CIFD) from 1000 patients between 18 and 35 years of age without spinal pathology. CCS was determined as two standard deviations below the mean of the collected measurements.
resultsIrrespective of vertebral level, mean anatomic APD, CIFD and IPD measurements were as follows: 14.94 ± 1.99 mm for APD, 6.58 ± 1.45 mm and 6.68 ± 1.45 mm for left and right widths, of 9.30 ± 2.30 mm and 9.25 ± 2.80 mm for left and right heights, 57.0 ± 19.2 mm2 and 59.5 ± 20.3 mm2 for left and right areas, and 25.4 ± 1.78 mm for IPD. Irrespective of vertebral level, threshold values for CCS were 10.96 mm for APD, 3.68 mm and 3.78 mm for left and right widths, of 4.70 mm and 3.65 mm for left and right heights, 20.6 mm2 and 19 mm2 for left and right areas, and 21.8 mm for IPD. Males demonstrated larger CCS threshold values than females for left and right CIFD area and APD. African American patients had smaller CIFDs and APD, and subsequent CCS thresholds compared to White patients.
conclusionsThis study reports measurements of CIFD, IPD, and APD to establish quantitative thresholds for diagnosis of CCS. CCS thresholds were significantly influenced by patient sex, race, and ethnicity.
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.