MRI kinematic analysis of T1 sagittal motion between cervical flexion and extension positions in 145 patients
Although the T1 vertebra is considered as an important factor of cervical balance, little is known about its motion between flexion and extension. The purpose of present study was to analyze the T1 sagittal motion using kinematic magnetic resonance imaging (kMRI), and to identify factors that relate to T1 sagittal motion.
We retrospectively analyzed 145 kMR images taken in weight-bearing neutral, flexion and extension positions. Cervical balance parameters were evaluated in each position. The degree of T1 sagittal motion was defined as [(T1 slope at extension) − (T1 slope at flexion)]. All patients were divided into three groups: Positive group (T1 followed the head motion, T1 sagittal motion > 5°), Stable group (5 ≥, ≥ − 5) and Negative group (T1 moved in the opposite direction from the head motion, > − 5). The groups were compared and multivariate logistic regression analysis was calculated.
There were 57 (40%) patients in the positive, 56 (39%) in the stable and 32 (22%) in the negative group. The positive group had the largest C2–7 sagittal vertical axis in flexion (p < 0.001) and the shortest in the extension (p = 0.023). Similar trends were seen in cranial tilt and cervical tilt. The value of T1 height < 27 mm was a significant independent factor for the negative group (p = 0.008, adjusted odds ratio = 5.958).
Based on T1 sagittal motion, 40% of the patients were classified in positive group (the T1 vertebra followed the head motion in flexion and extension), and 20% were classified in the negative group (the T1 vertebra moved in the opposite direction from the head motion). T1 height < 27 mm was a potential predictor of negative group.
KeywordsKinematic magnetic resonance imaging T1 slope T1 sagittal motion Cervical sagittal balance T1 height
- 1.Tang JA, Scheer JK, Smith JS, Deviren V, Bess S, Hart RA, Lafage V, Shaffrey CI, Schwab F, Ames CP, ISSG (2012) The impact of standing regional cervical sagittal alignment on outcomes in posterior cervical fusion surgery. Neurosurgery 71:662–669. 10.1227/NEU.0b013e31826100c9 (discussion 669) CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 2.Sakai K, Yoshii T, Hirai T, Arai Y, Torigoe I, Tomori M, Sato H, Okawa A (2016) Cervical sagittal imbalance is a predictor of kyphotic deformity after laminoplasty in cervical spondylotic myelopathy patients without preoperative kyphotic alignment. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 41:299–305. 10.1097/BRS.0000000000001206 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 3.Ames CP, Blondel B, Scheer JK, Schwab FJ, Le Huec JC, Massicotte EM, Patel AA, Traynelis VC, Kim HJ, Shaffrey CI, Smith JS, Lafage V (2013) Cervical radiographical alignment: comprehensive assessment techniques and potential importance in cervical myelopathy. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 38:S149–S160. 10.1097/BRS.0b013e3182a7f449 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 8.Oe S, Yamato Y, Togawa D, Kurosu K, Mihara Y, Banno T, Yasuda T, Kobayashi S, Hasegawa T, Matsuyama Y (2016) Preoperative T1 slope more than 40 degrees as a risk factor of correction loss in patients with adult spinal deformity. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 41:E1168–E1176. 10.1097/BRS.0000000000001578 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 13.Suzuki A, Daubs MD, Inoue H, Hayashi T, Aghdasi B, Montgomery SR, Ruangchainikom M, Hu X, Lee CJ, Wang CJ, Wang BJ, Nakamura H (2013) Prevalence and motion characteristics of degenerative cervical spondylolisthesis in the symptomatic adult. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 38:E1115–E1120. 10.1097/BRS.0b013e31829b1487 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 23.Oe S, Togawa D, Nakai K, Yamada T, Arima H, Banno T, Yasuda T, Kobayasi S, Yamato Y, Hasegawa T, Yoshida G, Matsuyama Y (2015) The influence of age and sex on cervical spinal alignment among volunteers aged over 50. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 40:1487–1494. 10.1097/BRS.0000000000001071 CrossRefGoogle Scholar