2005
DOI: 10.4097/kjae.2005.48.6.605
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Prediction of the Distance from Skin to Mid-Thoracic Epidural Space by Computed Tomography

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

1
0
0

Year Published

2006
2006
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
4

Relationship

0
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 4 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 2 publications
1
0
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In this study, the correlation between the actual depth extending to the thoracic epidural space and the CT-guided calculated depth was also examined. The calculated depth was found to be larger than the actual depth, a finding consistent with the results reported by Kao et al [ 13 ] in a study in which the depth was measured in the lower thoracic region (T10-11), yet contradictory to the results of Lee et al [ 14 ], in whose study the actual depth in the midthoracic region (T7-8) was found to be larger than the calculated depth. The reason why the calculated depth was larger than the actual depth in our study is presumably that the position the patients were instructed to assume (i.e., the prone position, with support from a 10 cm deep pillow) had tightened the skin more than in the supine position where, as in a CT scan, the patients lie on their back, with their arms raised.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 77%
“…In this study, the correlation between the actual depth extending to the thoracic epidural space and the CT-guided calculated depth was also examined. The calculated depth was found to be larger than the actual depth, a finding consistent with the results reported by Kao et al [ 13 ] in a study in which the depth was measured in the lower thoracic region (T10-11), yet contradictory to the results of Lee et al [ 14 ], in whose study the actual depth in the midthoracic region (T7-8) was found to be larger than the calculated depth. The reason why the calculated depth was larger than the actual depth in our study is presumably that the position the patients were instructed to assume (i.e., the prone position, with support from a 10 cm deep pillow) had tightened the skin more than in the supine position where, as in a CT scan, the patients lie on their back, with their arms raised.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 77%