Cargando…

Are plain radiographic measurements still consistent with a diagnosis of basilar invagination in the era of cross-sectional images?

Retrospective cross-sectional study To evaluate the validity and obtain optimal cutoff values of 3 radiologic measurements for the diagnosis of basilar invagination (BI). Two hundred seventy-six patients (46 patients who underwent atlantoaxial fusion for BI and 230 patients who were treated for mino...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Park, Jong-Hyeok, Kim, Jong Tae, Kim, Il Sup, Hong, Jae Taek
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9509112/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36197204
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000030552
_version_ 1784797163564302336
author Park, Jong-Hyeok
Kim, Jong Tae
Kim, Il Sup
Hong, Jae Taek
author_facet Park, Jong-Hyeok
Kim, Jong Tae
Kim, Il Sup
Hong, Jae Taek
author_sort Park, Jong-Hyeok
collection PubMed
description Retrospective cross-sectional study To evaluate the validity and obtain optimal cutoff values of 3 radiologic measurements for the diagnosis of basilar invagination (BI). Two hundred seventy-six patients (46 patients who underwent atlantoaxial fusion for BI and 230 patients who were treated for minor cervical trauma) seen in a single institution from January 2010 to December 2016 were included in this study. Age, sex, and body mass index were adjusted for the patients. The Ranawat index (RI), modified Ranawat method (MRM), and Redlund-Johnell method (RJM) were used to diagnose BI on plain radiographs. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, accuracy, and diagnostic odds ratio of 3 radiologic measurements were compared. We also calculated the optimized cutoff values of 3 radiologic measurements using the receiver operating characteristic curve in our patients. The mean age of the 130 women and 146 men was 58.3 ± 14.5 years. The mean values of RI, MRM, and RJM in the BI group were 12.5 ± 3.3, 23.1 ± 3.8, and 27.3 ± 3.6 in women and 13.6 ± 2.6, 26.8 ± 4.2, and 34.7 ± 5.1 in men. There was a significant difference between the sexes (P < .05). The accuracies of RI, MRM, and RJM were 95%, 89.6%, and 92.3% in women and 93%, 68.2%, and 85.4% in men, respectively. The optimized cutoff values of RI, MRM, and RJM were 14, 26, and 32 mm in women and 15, 29, and 38 mm in men. Three radiologic measurements (RI, MRM, and RJM) are reliable for the diagnosis of BI even in the era of cross-sectional images. The validity of these measurements depends on sex and particular radiologic measurement. The optimized cutoff values of RI, MRM, and RJM were 14, 26, and 32 mm in women and 15, 29, and 37 mm in men. These cutoff values showed high validity when compared to the CT and MRI findings.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9509112
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-95091122022-09-26 Are plain radiographic measurements still consistent with a diagnosis of basilar invagination in the era of cross-sectional images? Park, Jong-Hyeok Kim, Jong Tae Kim, Il Sup Hong, Jae Taek Medicine (Baltimore) Research Article Retrospective cross-sectional study To evaluate the validity and obtain optimal cutoff values of 3 radiologic measurements for the diagnosis of basilar invagination (BI). Two hundred seventy-six patients (46 patients who underwent atlantoaxial fusion for BI and 230 patients who were treated for minor cervical trauma) seen in a single institution from January 2010 to December 2016 were included in this study. Age, sex, and body mass index were adjusted for the patients. The Ranawat index (RI), modified Ranawat method (MRM), and Redlund-Johnell method (RJM) were used to diagnose BI on plain radiographs. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, accuracy, and diagnostic odds ratio of 3 radiologic measurements were compared. We also calculated the optimized cutoff values of 3 radiologic measurements using the receiver operating characteristic curve in our patients. The mean age of the 130 women and 146 men was 58.3 ± 14.5 years. The mean values of RI, MRM, and RJM in the BI group were 12.5 ± 3.3, 23.1 ± 3.8, and 27.3 ± 3.6 in women and 13.6 ± 2.6, 26.8 ± 4.2, and 34.7 ± 5.1 in men. There was a significant difference between the sexes (P < .05). The accuracies of RI, MRM, and RJM were 95%, 89.6%, and 92.3% in women and 93%, 68.2%, and 85.4% in men, respectively. The optimized cutoff values of RI, MRM, and RJM were 14, 26, and 32 mm in women and 15, 29, and 38 mm in men. Three radiologic measurements (RI, MRM, and RJM) are reliable for the diagnosis of BI even in the era of cross-sectional images. The validity of these measurements depends on sex and particular radiologic measurement. The optimized cutoff values of RI, MRM, and RJM were 14, 26, and 32 mm in women and 15, 29, and 37 mm in men. These cutoff values showed high validity when compared to the CT and MRI findings. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins 2022-09-23 /pmc/articles/PMC9509112/ /pubmed/36197204 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000030552 Text en Copyright © 2022 the Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial License 4.0 (CCBY-NC) (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) , where it is permissible to download, share, remix, transform, and buildup the work provided it is properly cited. The work cannot be used commercially without permission from the journal.
spellingShingle Research Article
Park, Jong-Hyeok
Kim, Jong Tae
Kim, Il Sup
Hong, Jae Taek
Are plain radiographic measurements still consistent with a diagnosis of basilar invagination in the era of cross-sectional images?
title Are plain radiographic measurements still consistent with a diagnosis of basilar invagination in the era of cross-sectional images?
title_full Are plain radiographic measurements still consistent with a diagnosis of basilar invagination in the era of cross-sectional images?
title_fullStr Are plain radiographic measurements still consistent with a diagnosis of basilar invagination in the era of cross-sectional images?
title_full_unstemmed Are plain radiographic measurements still consistent with a diagnosis of basilar invagination in the era of cross-sectional images?
title_short Are plain radiographic measurements still consistent with a diagnosis of basilar invagination in the era of cross-sectional images?
title_sort are plain radiographic measurements still consistent with a diagnosis of basilar invagination in the era of cross-sectional images?
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9509112/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36197204
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000030552
work_keys_str_mv AT parkjonghyeok areplainradiographicmeasurementsstillconsistentwithadiagnosisofbasilarinvaginationintheeraofcrosssectionalimages
AT kimjongtae areplainradiographicmeasurementsstillconsistentwithadiagnosisofbasilarinvaginationintheeraofcrosssectionalimages
AT kimilsup areplainradiographicmeasurementsstillconsistentwithadiagnosisofbasilarinvaginationintheeraofcrosssectionalimages
AT hongjaetaek areplainradiographicmeasurementsstillconsistentwithadiagnosisofbasilarinvaginationintheeraofcrosssectionalimages