4.5 Article

The vertical projection of the sum of the ground reactive forces of a standing patient is not the same as the C7 plumb line - A radiographic study of the sagittal alignment of 153 asymptomatic volunteers

期刊

SPINE
卷 31, 期 11, 页码 E320-E325

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/01.brs.0000218263.58642.ff

关键词

sagittal alignment; C7 plumb line; sagittal vertical axis; ground reactive force; gravity line

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Study Design. A radiographic study of 153 normal volunteers. Objectives. 1) To test the hypothesis that the vertical projection of the sum of the ground reactive forces of a standing patient is located in the same place in the sagittal plane as the C7 plumb line; 2) to determine if there are consistent geometric relationships between the location of the top of the spine and the pelvis in the sagittal plane that occur in individuals without symptoms of back pain or radiographic evidence of deformity. Summary of Background Data. Defining the optimal state of spinal balance is difficult. A full understanding of the compensatory relationships between the spine, pelvis, and lower limbs remains elusive. Methods. A total of 153 normal volunteers were subjected to radiographic examination using a digital force plate, a stabilized standing position, a standardized radiographic technique, and the computerized measurement of sagittal alignment. Results. 1) The C7 plumb line and the gravity line in a stabilized standing position are not located in the same place; 2) the association between the center of T1 and the sacral endplate may be an anatomic constant and a marker of spinal balance in individuals without symptoms of back pain or radiographic evidence of deformity, and is determined by the formula 99 degrees - 0.1 degrees ( sacral slope). Conclusions. We speculate that this information will be very helpful in evaluating symptomatic spinal disease in the context of the overall alignment of the spine and pelvis.

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

4.5
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