PAC System for Radiographic Comparison of Standing and Supine Lateral Views in Patients with Low-Grade Spondylolisthesis
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.36552/pjns.v27i1.844Keywords:
picture archiving and communication system, digital imaging and communication in medicine, low-grade spondylolisthesisAbstract
Objective: Supine views may not adequately depict low-degree spondylolisthesis, thereby confusing surgeons in deciding the best therapy plan. The study aimed to compare the standing vs. supine radiographs for the radiological parameters.
Materials and Methods: A retrospective investigation was conducted on the standing and supine lateral radiographs of 73 patients with graduation I and II spondylolisthesis at the orthopedic Outdoor patient department. The measurements included lumbar lordosis angle, sacral inclination, slip angle, disc slip, and disc height, which were obtained from the PACS.
Results: Mean age was 47.28 years with 41% male and 58.9% females. Prevalence showed 46.57% having L4, 5 level involvement and 53.4% having L5, S1 level involvement in spondylolisthesis. The degree of lumbar lordosis turned out to be 41.7 upon standing while it was 34.39 degrees upon supine position. The size of the disc slip was 0.85cm and 0.74 cm in standing and supine positions respectively. Standing sacral inclination was 45.5 degrees and 40.51 degrees in supine. The slip angle was higher in standing (4.5 degrees) versus 3.97 degrees in the supine position. Disc heights were nearly the same in standing or supine (1.2 cm vs. 1.1 cm) positions. There existed a significant difference between standing vs. supine positions for the following: lumbar lordosis, disc slip, sacral inclination, and slip angle.
Conclusion: Supine views may not accurately show important radiological findings, affecting the choice of treatment. Surgeons may use these findings to make informed decisions about the best treatment plan.
References
Dhakal GR, Biswas A, Rathinavelu S, Patel DK, Basu S. Comparison between standing and supine lateral radiographs in low grade spondylolisthesis. Journal of Manmohan Memorial Institute of Health Sciences, 2015 Jan 31; 1 (4):1 4-8.
Cabraja M, Mohamed E, Koeppen D, Kroppenstedt S. The analysis of segmental mobility with different lumbar radiographs in symptomatic patients with a spondylolisthesis. European Spine Journal, 2012 Feb; 21: 256-61.
Leone A, Guglielmi G, Cassar-Pullicino VN, Bonomo L. Lumbar intervertebral instability: a review. Radiology, 2007 Oct; 245 (1): 62-77.
Leone A, Cassar-Pullicino VN, Guglielmi G, Bonomo L. Degenerative lumbar intervertebral instability: what is it and how does imaging contribute?. Skeletal Radiology, 2009 Jun; 38: 529-33.
Boxall D, Bradford DS, Winter RB, Moe JH. Management of severe spondylolisthesis in children and adolescents. JBJS. 1979 Jun. 1; 61 (4): 479-95.
Sun K, Liang L, Yin H, Yu J, Feng M, Zhan J, Jin Z, Yin X, Wei X, Zhu L. Manipulation for treatment of degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis: a protocol of systematic review and meta-analysis. Medicine, 2019 Dec; 98 (49).
Guo M, Kong C, Sun S, Sun X, Li X, Lu S. Predictors of L4? L5 Degenerative Lumbar Spondylolisthesis: L4 Inclination Angle and Facet Joint Angle. World Neurosurgery, 2019 Oct. 1; 130: e680-6.
Weinstein JN, Lurie JD, Tosteson TD, Hanscom B, Tosteson AN, Blood EA, Birkmeyer NJ, Hilibrand AS, Herkowitz H, Cammisa FP, Albert TJ. Surgical versus nonsurgical treatment for lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis. New England Journal of Medicine, 2007 May 31; 356 (22): 2257-70.
Gu G, Zhang H, Fan G, He S, Cai X, Shen X, Guan X, Zhou X. Comparison of minimally invasive versus open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion in two-level degenerative lumbar disease. International Orthopaedics, 2014 Apr; 38: 817-24.
Dijkerman ML, Overdevest GM, Moojen WA, Vleggeert-Lankamp CL. Decompression with or without concomitant fusion in lumbar stenosis due to degenerative spondylolisthesis: a systematic review. European Spine Journal, 2018 Jul; 27: 1629-43.
Martin CR, Gruszczynski AT, Braunsfurth HA, Fallatah SM, O'Neil J, Wai EK. The surgical management of degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis: a systematic review. Spine, 2007 Jul. 15; 32 (16): 1791-8.
Caelers IJ, Rijkers K, van Hemert WL, de Bie RA, van Santbrink H. Lumbar spondylolisthesis; common, but surgery is rarely needed. Nederlands Tijdschrift Voor Geneeskunde. 2019 Sep. 24; 163.
Dunn AS, Baylis S, Ryan D. Chiropractic management of mechanical low back pain secondary to multiple-level lumbar spondylolysis with spondylolisthesis in a United States Marine Corps veteran: a case report. Journal of chiropractic Medicine, 2009 Sep. 1; 8 (3): 125-30.
Kabir S, Ullah I, Khan MZ, Kamran A, Hussain S. Assessment of Instability in Degenerative Lumbar Spondylolisthesis using the Standing and Supine Lateral Radiographs. Journal of Pakistan Orthopaedic Association, 2021 Nov. 18; 33 (04): 176-9.
Ilyas H, Udo-Inyang I, Savage J. Lumbar spinal stenosis and degenerative spondylolisthesis. Clinical Spine Surgery, 2019 Aug. 1; 32 (7): 272-8.
Hashim NA, Kadhim RJ. The Value of Standing X-ray in Detecting Physiological Spondylolisthesis in Patients with Single Disc Prolapse with Normal Intensity MRI Findings. Systematic Reviews in Pharmacy, 2020; 11 (9): 243-7.
Randall RM, Silverstein M, Goodwin R. Review of pediatric spondylolysis and spondylolisthesis. Sports Medicine and Arthroscopy Review, 2016; 24 (4): 184-7.
Randall RM, Silverstein M, Goodwin R. Review of pediatric spondylolysis and spondylolisthesis. Sports Medicine and Arthroscopy Review, 2016; 24 (4): 184-7.
Tarpada SP, Cho W, Chen F, Amorosa LF. Utility of supine lateral radiographs for assessment of lumbar segmental instability in degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis. Spine, 2018; 43 (18): 1275-80.
Bhimani S, Glassman SD, Creek AT, Dimar II JR, Djurasovic M, Carreon LY. Wednesday, September 26, 2018 7: 35 AM–9: 00 AM ePosters: P31. Clinical utility of supine MRIs, lateral standing and flexion–extension X-ray images in patients with grade 1 spondylolisthesis. The Spine Journal, 2018; 18 (8): S155-6.
Cabraja M, Mohamed E, Koeppen D, Kroppenstedt S. The analysis of segmental mobility with different lumbar radiographs in symptomatic patients with a spondylolisthesis. European Spine Journal, 2012; 21: 256-61.
Lowe RW, Hayes TD, Kaye J, Bagg RJ, Luekens Jr CA. Standing roentgenograms in spondylolisthesis. Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research (1976-2007). 1976; 117: 80-4.
Chan V, Marro A, Rempel J, Nataraj A. Determination of dynamic instability in lumbar spondylolisthesis using flexion and extension standing radiographs versus neutral standing radiograph and supine MRI. Journal of Neurosurgery: Spine, 2019; 31 (2): 229-35.
Kuhns BD, Kouk S, Buchanan C, Lubelski D, Alvin MD, Benzel EC, Mroz TE, Tozzi J. Sensitivity of magnetic resonance imaging in the diagnosis of mobile and nonmobile L4–L5 degenerative spondylolisthesis. The Spine Journal, 2015; 15 (9):
-62.
Zhou QS, Sun X, Chen X, Xu L, Qian BP, Zhu Z, Qiu Y. Utility of natural sitting lateral radiograph in the diagnosis of segmental instability for patients with degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis. Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research, 2021; 479 (4): 817.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2023 Pakistan Journal Of Neurological Surgery
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
The work published by PJNS is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0). Copyrights on any open access article published by Pakistan Journal of Neurological Surgery are retained by the author(s).
