Cargando…
A Comparison of Radiostereometric Analysis and Computed Tomography for the Assessment of Lumbar Spinal Fusion in a Sheep Model
Study Design Prospective animal study. Objective The aim of this animal study is to evaluate the accuracy of radiostereometric analysis (RSA) compared with computed tomographic (CT) scan in the assessment of spinal fusion after anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) using histology as a gold standa...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Georg Thieme Verlag KG
2013
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3836947/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24436705 http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/s-0033-1357359 |
_version_ | 1782292372720189440 |
---|---|
author | Humadi, Ali Freeman, Brian J. C. Moore, Rob J. Callary, Stuart Halldin, Klas David, Vikram Maclaurin, William Tauro, Paul Schoenwaelder, Mark |
author_facet | Humadi, Ali Freeman, Brian J. C. Moore, Rob J. Callary, Stuart Halldin, Klas David, Vikram Maclaurin, William Tauro, Paul Schoenwaelder, Mark |
author_sort | Humadi, Ali |
collection | PubMed |
description | Study Design Prospective animal study. Objective The aim of this animal study is to evaluate the accuracy of radiostereometric analysis (RSA) compared with computed tomographic (CT) scan in the assessment of spinal fusion after anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) using histology as a gold standard. Methods Three non-adjacent ALIFs (L1–L2, L3–L4, and L5–L6) were performed in nine sheep. The sheep were divided into three groups of three sheep. All the animals were humanely killed immediately after having the last scheduled RSA. The lumbar spine was removed and in vitro fine cut CT and histopathology were performed. Results Using histological assessment as the gold standard for assessing fusion, RSA demonstrated better results (100% sensitivity and 66.7% specificity; positive predictive value [PPV] = 27.3%, negative predictive value [NPV] =100.0%) compared with CT (66.7% sensitivity and 60.0% specificity [PPV = 16.7%, NPV = 93.8%]). Conclusions RSA demonstrated higher sensitivity and specificity when compared with CT. Furthermore, RSA has the advantage of much lower radiation exposure compared with fine cut CT. Further studies are required to see if RSA remains superior to CT scan for the assessment spinal fusion in the clinical setting. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-3836947 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2013 |
publisher | Georg Thieme Verlag KG |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-38369472014-10-01 A Comparison of Radiostereometric Analysis and Computed Tomography for the Assessment of Lumbar Spinal Fusion in a Sheep Model Humadi, Ali Freeman, Brian J. C. Moore, Rob J. Callary, Stuart Halldin, Klas David, Vikram Maclaurin, William Tauro, Paul Schoenwaelder, Mark Evid Based Spine Care J Article Study Design Prospective animal study. Objective The aim of this animal study is to evaluate the accuracy of radiostereometric analysis (RSA) compared with computed tomographic (CT) scan in the assessment of spinal fusion after anterior lumbar interbody fusion (ALIF) using histology as a gold standard. Methods Three non-adjacent ALIFs (L1–L2, L3–L4, and L5–L6) were performed in nine sheep. The sheep were divided into three groups of three sheep. All the animals were humanely killed immediately after having the last scheduled RSA. The lumbar spine was removed and in vitro fine cut CT and histopathology were performed. Results Using histological assessment as the gold standard for assessing fusion, RSA demonstrated better results (100% sensitivity and 66.7% specificity; positive predictive value [PPV] = 27.3%, negative predictive value [NPV] =100.0%) compared with CT (66.7% sensitivity and 60.0% specificity [PPV = 16.7%, NPV = 93.8%]). Conclusions RSA demonstrated higher sensitivity and specificity when compared with CT. Furthermore, RSA has the advantage of much lower radiation exposure compared with fine cut CT. Further studies are required to see if RSA remains superior to CT scan for the assessment spinal fusion in the clinical setting. Georg Thieme Verlag KG 2013-10 /pmc/articles/PMC3836947/ /pubmed/24436705 http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/s-0033-1357359 Text en © Thieme Medical Publishers |
spellingShingle | Article Humadi, Ali Freeman, Brian J. C. Moore, Rob J. Callary, Stuart Halldin, Klas David, Vikram Maclaurin, William Tauro, Paul Schoenwaelder, Mark A Comparison of Radiostereometric Analysis and Computed Tomography for the Assessment of Lumbar Spinal Fusion in a Sheep Model |
title | A Comparison of Radiostereometric Analysis and Computed Tomography for the Assessment of Lumbar Spinal Fusion in a Sheep Model |
title_full | A Comparison of Radiostereometric Analysis and Computed Tomography for the Assessment of Lumbar Spinal Fusion in a Sheep Model |
title_fullStr | A Comparison of Radiostereometric Analysis and Computed Tomography for the Assessment of Lumbar Spinal Fusion in a Sheep Model |
title_full_unstemmed | A Comparison of Radiostereometric Analysis and Computed Tomography for the Assessment of Lumbar Spinal Fusion in a Sheep Model |
title_short | A Comparison of Radiostereometric Analysis and Computed Tomography for the Assessment of Lumbar Spinal Fusion in a Sheep Model |
title_sort | comparison of radiostereometric analysis and computed tomography for the assessment of lumbar spinal fusion in a sheep model |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3836947/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24436705 http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/s-0033-1357359 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT humadiali acomparisonofradiostereometricanalysisandcomputedtomographyfortheassessmentoflumbarspinalfusioninasheepmodel AT freemanbrianjc acomparisonofradiostereometricanalysisandcomputedtomographyfortheassessmentoflumbarspinalfusioninasheepmodel AT moorerobj acomparisonofradiostereometricanalysisandcomputedtomographyfortheassessmentoflumbarspinalfusioninasheepmodel AT callarystuart acomparisonofradiostereometricanalysisandcomputedtomographyfortheassessmentoflumbarspinalfusioninasheepmodel AT halldinklas acomparisonofradiostereometricanalysisandcomputedtomographyfortheassessmentoflumbarspinalfusioninasheepmodel AT davidvikram acomparisonofradiostereometricanalysisandcomputedtomographyfortheassessmentoflumbarspinalfusioninasheepmodel AT maclaurinwilliam acomparisonofradiostereometricanalysisandcomputedtomographyfortheassessmentoflumbarspinalfusioninasheepmodel AT tauropaul acomparisonofradiostereometricanalysisandcomputedtomographyfortheassessmentoflumbarspinalfusioninasheepmodel AT schoenwaeldermark acomparisonofradiostereometricanalysisandcomputedtomographyfortheassessmentoflumbarspinalfusioninasheepmodel AT humadiali comparisonofradiostereometricanalysisandcomputedtomographyfortheassessmentoflumbarspinalfusioninasheepmodel AT freemanbrianjc comparisonofradiostereometricanalysisandcomputedtomographyfortheassessmentoflumbarspinalfusioninasheepmodel AT moorerobj comparisonofradiostereometricanalysisandcomputedtomographyfortheassessmentoflumbarspinalfusioninasheepmodel AT callarystuart comparisonofradiostereometricanalysisandcomputedtomographyfortheassessmentoflumbarspinalfusioninasheepmodel AT halldinklas comparisonofradiostereometricanalysisandcomputedtomographyfortheassessmentoflumbarspinalfusioninasheepmodel AT davidvikram comparisonofradiostereometricanalysisandcomputedtomographyfortheassessmentoflumbarspinalfusioninasheepmodel AT maclaurinwilliam comparisonofradiostereometricanalysisandcomputedtomographyfortheassessmentoflumbarspinalfusioninasheepmodel AT tauropaul comparisonofradiostereometricanalysisandcomputedtomographyfortheassessmentoflumbarspinalfusioninasheepmodel AT schoenwaeldermark comparisonofradiostereometricanalysisandcomputedtomographyfortheassessmentoflumbarspinalfusioninasheepmodel |