Views: 1,330 | Downloads:
26
| Responses: 0
| XML | Respond to this article | Alert & updates | Request permissions | Email to a friend |
Original ArticleOpen Access
The Mid pedicular and Interpedicular Distance of Thoracolumbar Vertebrae
Saengnipanthkul S 
,
Jiraratanaphochai K
,
Jiraratanaphochai K KITTI JIRARATANAPHOCHAI, MD*,
PAKORN NARAKOL, MD*
Objectives : 1. To introduce the measurement of the midpedicular distance (MPD) as an
alternative to the interpedicular distance (IPD).
2. To measure the IPD and MPD of T
11
,
T
12
,
L
1
and L
2
vertebrae on antero-
posterior (AP) plain film of the normal spine.
3. To study the relationship of the IPD and MPD of T
11
to L
2
of the normal spine.
Study design : Thoracolumbar AP plain film of 89 subjects (39 males, 50 females) with an
average age of 47.6 years (range 21-78 years) from the roentgenographic files were included. Both
the IPD and MPD ofT
11
,
T
12
,
L
1
and L
2
were measured by two observers. The mean difference of IPD
and MPD at these four levels were compared by using a one-way ANOV A. The relationship of the
IPD and MPD measured from the T
11
to L
2
levels were evaluated using the simple linear regression
model.
Results: The mean IPD was progressively wider (p
=
0.000) from the T
11
to L
1
level, but no
significant difference (p
=
0.308) was found between the mean IPDs of L
1
and L
2
*
The mean MPD of each level was significantly different from the others (p
=
0.000) except
the mean MPDs ofT
12
and L
1
(p
=
1.000).
Both the IPD and MPD had a statistically significant linear relationship with the level of the
vertebrae from T
11
to L
2
(p
=
0.000) with the coefficients of determination (R2
)
of 0.39 and 0.28,
respectively.
Conclusion : More care should be taken in clinical practice when measuring the IPD of a
fractured vertebra relative to those of adjacent lower levels in order to determine whether or not
widening has occurred, especially IPD L
1
vis-a-vis IPD L
2
*
MPD measurement has no advantage over
the IPD measurement but is a useful alternative when a comparison of the pedicular distance of L
1
and L
2
is needed.
Key word : Midpedicular Distance, Interpedicular Distance, Thoracolumbar Spine
PAKORN NARAKOL, MD*
Objectives : 1. To introduce the measurement of the midpedicular distance (MPD) as an
alternative to the interpedicular distance (IPD).
2. To measure the IPD and MPD of T
11
,
T
12
,
L
1
and L
2
vertebrae on antero-
posterior (AP) plain film of the normal spine.
3. To study the relationship of the IPD and MPD of T
11
to L
2
of the normal spine.
Study design : Thoracolumbar AP plain film of 89 subjects (39 males, 50 females) with an
average age of 47.6 years (range 21-78 years) from the roentgenographic files were included. Both
the IPD and MPD ofT
11
,
T
12
,
L
1
and L
2
were measured by two observers. The mean difference of IPD
and MPD at these four levels were compared by using a one-way ANOV A. The relationship of the
IPD and MPD measured from the T
11
to L
2
levels were evaluated using the simple linear regression
model.
Results: The mean IPD was progressively wider (p
=
0.000) from the T
11
to L
1
level, but no
significant difference (p
=
0.308) was found between the mean IPDs of L
1
and L
2
*
The mean MPD of each level was significantly different from the others (p
=
0.000) except
the mean MPDs ofT
12
and L
1
(p
=
1.000).
Both the IPD and MPD had a statistically significant linear relationship with the level of the
vertebrae from T
11
to L
2
(p
=
0.000) with the coefficients of determination (R2
)
of 0.39 and 0.28,
respectively.
Conclusion : More care should be taken in clinical practice when measuring the IPD of a
fractured vertebra relative to those of adjacent lower levels in order to determine whether or not
widening has occurred, especially IPD L
1
vis-a-vis IPD L
2
*
MPD measurement has no advantage over
the IPD measurement but is a useful alternative when a comparison of the pedicular distance of L
1
and L
2
is needed.
Key word : Midpedicular Distance, Interpedicular Distance, Thoracolumbar Spine
Download:
PDF