COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHIC MORPHOMETRY OF THE LUMBOSACRAL SPINE OF DOGS

被引:0
|
作者
JONES, JC
WRIGHT, JC
BARTELS, JE
机构
[1] AUBURN UNIV, COLL VET MED, DEPT PATHOBIOL, AUBURN, AL 36849 USA
[2] AUBURN UNIV, COLL VET MED, DEPT RADIOL, AUBURN, AL 36849 USA
关键词
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
S85 [动物医学(兽医学)];
学科分类号
0906 ;
摘要
In a 5-year prospective study, computed tomographic (CT) morphometry of the lumbosacral vertebral canal was performed on 42 large-breed dogs (21 controls and 21 dogs with lumbosacral stenosis). Dogs were allotted to 4 groups. Group 1 (n = 13) consisted of cadaver specimens obtained from dogs that died or were euthanatized for reasons unrelated to the spine; group 2 (n = 8) consisted of live dogs with no history of clinical signs related to the spine and with normal neurologic examination findings; group 3 (n = 10) consisted of dogs with surgically confirmed lumbosacral stenosis; and group 4 (n = 11) consisted of dogs with suspected lumbosacral stenosis that were managed conservatively. The CT scans were performed, using 5-mm contiguous slices obtained perpendicular to the vertebral canal, from the midbody of the 5th lumbar vertebra through the caudal endplate of the sacrum (L5-S3). Lumbosacral lordosis was minimized in all dogs by positioning them in dorsal recumbency with the hind limbs flexed. A tuberculin syringe calibration phantom was placed within the scanning field of view, parallel to the axis of the spine. In each dog, 11 CT slice locations within the lumbosacral spine were evaluated. At each slice location, sagittal plane diameter, dorsal plane diameter, and transverse area of the vertebral canal, vertebral body, and calibration phantom were measured, using the CT computer's software programs for distance and area calculation. Window/level settings were constant, and all measurements were made by the same operator (JCJ). Accuracy of calibration phantom cr measurements was 100% for sagittal and dorsal plane diameter and was 85% for transverse area. In control dogs (groups 1 and 2), vertebral canal dimensions were significantly (r greater than or equal to 0.50, P less than or equal to 0.0001) correlated with vertebral body dimensions, but not with dog weight or age. There were no significant differences between group 1 vs group 2, and group 3 vs group 4 for all absolute vertebral canal dimensions and for 5 ratios of vertebral canal to correlated vertebral body dimensions (general linear model for ANOVA). Pooled control dogs (n = 21) and those with lumbosacral stenosis (n = 21) were compared, and significant differences were not identified for absolute canal dimensions. Significant differences between control dogs and those with lumbosacral stenosis were identified in the ratios of vertebral canal transverse area to vertebral body sagittal diameter (P less than or equal to 0.01) and vertebral canal transverse area to vertebral body transverse area (P less than or equal to 0.001). For both these ratios, analysis by slice location identified significant differences (P < 0.05) between pooled groups at the caudal pedicles of L5 and L6. For the ratio of transverse canal area to sagittal vertebral body diameter, differences (P less than or equal to 0.05) also were found at the cranial pedicle of L7. These results indicate that: CT is an accurate method for performing morphometry of the canine lumbosacral spine; vertebral canal dimensions can be corrected for differences in dog size by calculating ratios of vertebral canal to vertebral body dimensions; statistical comparisons, using such corrected vertebral canal dimensions, may reveal differences not evident when absolute vertebral canal dimensions are used; and corrected transverse area of the vertebral canal differs in large-breed dogs with lumbosacral stenosis vs normal controls. Morphometric differences identified at more than 1 vertebral level support a theory that multilevel congenital or developmental stenosis of the lumbosacral vertebral canal may be a predisposing or contributing factor in large-breed dogs with acquired lumbosacral stenosis.
引用
收藏
页码:1125 / 1132
页数:8
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHIC ANATOMY OF THE CANINE LUMBOSACRAL SPINE
    JONES, JC
    CARTEE, RE
    BARTELS, JE
    VETERINARY RADIOLOGY & ULTRASOUND, 1995, 36 (02) : 91 - 99
  • [2] THE PAINFUL POSTOPERATIVE LUMBOSACRAL SPINE - COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHIC ANALYSIS
    KNACKSETDT, VE
    OSBORN, AG
    WING, SD
    ANDERSON, RE
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF NEURORADIOLOGY, 1982, 3 (01) : 95 - 95
  • [3] Computed Tomographic Morphometry of Lumbar Spine in Indian Population
    Singh, Vivek
    Prasad, Surya Nandan
    Neyaz, Zafar
    Bhargava, Nishant
    Yadav, Uttam
    Srivastav, Arun Kumar
    Mishra, Prabhakar
    Phadke, Rajendra Vishnu
    INDIAN JOURNAL OF NEUROTRAUMA, 2022, 19 (01): : 12 - 18
  • [4] Qualitative and quantitative computed tomographic characteristics of the lumbosacral spine in German shepherd military working dogs with versus without lumbosacral pain
    Gamble, Kristopher Brian
    Jones, Jeryl C.
    Biddlecome, Amanda
    Bridges, William C.
    JOURNAL OF VETERINARY BEHAVIOR-CLINICAL APPLICATIONS AND RESEARCH, 2020, 38 : 38 - 55
  • [5] Morphometry of the thoracic spine in German shepherd dog: A computed tomographic study
    Dabanoglu, I
    Kara, ME
    Turan, E
    Ocal, MK
    ANATOMIA HISTOLOGIA EMBRYOLOGIA, 2004, 33 (01) : 53 - 58
  • [6] COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHIC DEMONSTRATION OF CALCIFICATION OF THE LIGAMENTA FLAVA OF THE LUMBOSACRAL SPINE IN ANKYLOSING-SPONDYLITIS
    AVRAHAMI, E
    WIGLER, I
    STERN, D
    CASPI, D
    YARON, M
    ANNALS OF THE RHEUMATIC DISEASES, 1988, 47 (01) : 62 - 64
  • [8] Computed tomographic evaluation of cervical vertebral canal and spinal cord morphometry in normal dogs
    Seo, Eunjeong
    Choi, Jihye
    Choi, Mincheol
    Yoon, Junghee
    JOURNAL OF VETERINARY SCIENCE, 2014, 15 (02) : 187 - 193
  • [9] COMPUTED AIR MYELOGRAPHY OF THE LUMBOSACRAL SPINE
    TAN, WS
    SPIGOS, DG
    KHINE, N
    RADIOLOGY, 1982, 144 (04) : 957 - 957
  • [10] COMPUTED AIR MYELOGRAPHY OF THE LUMBOSACRAL SPINE
    TAN, WS
    SPIGOS, DG
    KHINE, N
    JOURNAL OF COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY, 1983, 7 (01) : 200 - 200