4.1 Article

Difference of Sagittal Spinopelvic Alignments between Degenerative Spondylolisthesis and Isthmic Spondylolisthesis

期刊

JOURNAL OF KOREAN NEUROSURGICAL SOCIETY
卷 53, 期 2, 页码 96-101

出版社

KOREAN NEUROSURGICAL SOC
DOI: 10.3340/jkns.2013.53.2.96

关键词

Spinopelvic alignment; Pelvic incidence; Lumbar lordosis; Degenerative spondylolisthesis; Isthmic spondylolisthesis

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective : The purpose of this study was to analyze the differences of spinopelvic parameters between degenerative spondylolisthesis (DSPL) and isthmic spondylolisthesis (ISPL) patients. Methods : Thirty-four patients with DSPL and 19 patients with ISPL were included in this study. Spinopelvic parameters were evaluated on whole spine X-rays in a standing position. The following spinopelvic parameters were measured : pelvic incidence (PI), sacral slope, pelvic tilt (PT), lumbar lordosis (LL), and sagittal vertical axis from C7 plumb line (SVA). The population of patients was compared with a control population of 30 normal and asymptomatic adults. Results : There were statistically significant differences in LL (p=0.004) and SVA (p=0.005) between the DSPL and ISPL group. The LL of DSPL (42 +/- 13 degrees) was significantly lower than that of the control group (48 +/- 11 degrees; p=0.029), but that of ISPL (55 +/- 6 degrees) was significantly greater than a control group (p=0.004). The SVA of DSPL (55 +/- 49 mm) was greater than that of a control group (<40 mm), but that of ISPL (21 +/- 22 mm) was within 40 mm as that of a control group. The PT of DSPL (24 +/- 7 degrees) and ISPL (21 +/- 7 degrees) was significantly greater than that of a control group (11 +/- 6 degrees; p=0.000). Conclusion : Both symptomatic DSPL and ISPL patients had a greater PI than that of the asymptomatic control group. In conclusion, DSPL populations are likely to have global sagittal imbalance (high SVA) compared with ISPL populations because of the difference of lumbar lordosis between two groups.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.1
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据