Three-dimensional CT in the diagnosis of spinal trauma: comparison with plain film and two-dimensional CT examinations

Saeed, Muhammad; Buitrago-Téllez, C.; Ferstl, F. J.; Boos, S.; B, Wimmer; Langer, Mathias

doi:10.1007/bf00231203

Cited by 4 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Other authors [1,3] have emphasized that there is no additional diagnostic information given by 3 D reconstructions in traumatic spine lesions. Our results confirm the findings of these authors [8,10] who differentiated between several types of spinal fractures and who emphasized valuable information in spinal injuries with components of rotation and/or translation. The 3 D reconstructions were only useful in most type C injuries.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Diagnostic value of 3 D CT surface reconstruction in spinal fractures

et al. 1997

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Our purpose was to evaluate the diagnostic value of three-dimensional (3 D) CT surface reconstruction in spinal fractures in comparison with axial and reformatted images. A total of 50 patients with different CT-proven spinal fractures were analysed retrospectively. Based on axial scans and reformatted images, the spinal fractures were classified according to several classifications as Magerl for the thoraco-lumbar and lower cervical spine by one radiologist. Another radiologist performed 3 D CT surface reconstructions with the aim of characterizing the different types of spinal fractures. A third radiologist classified the 3 D CT surface reconstruction according to the Magerl classification. The results of the blinded reading process were compared. It was checked to see in which type and subgroup 3 D surface reconstructions were helpful. Readers one and two obtained the same results in the classification. The 3 D surface reconstruction did not yield any additional diagnostic information concerning type A and B injuries. Indeed, the full extent of the fracture could be easier recognized with axial and reformatted images in all cases. In 10 cases of C injuries, the dislocation of parts of vertebrae could be better recognized with the help of 3 D reconstructions. A 3 D CT surface reconstruction is only useful in rotational and shear vertebral injuries (Magerl type C injury).

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

“…The value of computed tomography (CT) in spinal fractures is presently well known. However, only few authors [8,[10][11][12] have investigated the role of three-dimensional (3 D) CT surface reconstructions in these cases. The purpose of this study was to estimate the value of 3 D reconstructions in the diagnostic process of spinal fractures.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Diagnostic value of 3 D CT surface reconstruction in spinal fractures

et al. 1997

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Dabei gelten die Wertigkeiten für den jeweiligen Kappawert wie folgt: < 0,2 = schlecht; 0,21 -0,40 = schwach; 0,41 -0,60 = mittel; 0,61 -0,80 = gut; 0,81 -1,00 = sehr gut. [27,28,30]. Andere Darstellungsformen lieferten bei diesen Frakturen keine entsprechend zuverlässigen Informationen, welche eine genaue und zutreffende Diagnose erlaubten.…”

Section: Introductionunclassified

“…Bei der Beurteilung des Spinalkanals war sie unter-, bei der Darstellung von C-Frakturen überlegen, insbesondere hinsichtlich der Beurteilung der Fragmentlokalisation in Relation zum Rückenmark und der Über-sicht über das Frakturausmaß[27]. Saeed[30] hielt den 3D-Modus diagnostisch für ähnlich effektiv wie den 2D-Modus. Bei Verletzungen der hinteren Säule schnitt die 3D-Darstellung allerdings schlechter ab als die 2D-oder die axiale Darstellung (50 vs. 97 vs. 61 korrekte Diagnosen).…”

unclassified