Kinematic magnetic resonance imaging study of the brain stem and cervical cord by dynamic neck motion

• Autorzy: Malis M. , Georgievski B. , Milic I. , Mijatovic A. , Kovacevic V. , Lazic D. , Kapor S. , Marinkovic S.
• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

Background: The aim was to examine the position of the brain stem and cervical cord following the neck flexion and extension. Materials and methods: The serial sagittal T2-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) sections of the cervical cord and brain stem were made in 6 volunteers. The images were mainly used to measure certain distances and angles of the brain stem and cervical cord in the neutral position, and then following the head and neck flexion and extension. Results: The measurements showed that the pons is slightly closer to the clivus following the neck flexion; the medulla oblongata is somewhat distant to the basion but closer to the odontoid process. At the same time, the spino-medullary angle diminishes in size. On the other hand, the upper cervical cord slightly approaches the posterior wall of the spinal canal, the lower cervical cord is closer to the anterior wall, while the angle between them is significantly larger in size. After the cervical cord extension, the rostral pons is somewhat distant to the clivus, whereas the caudal pons and the medulla are slightly closer to the clivus and the basion. At the same time, the spino-medullary angle diminishes in size. The cervical cord is mainly closer to the posterior wall of the spinal canal, whilst its angle is significantly smaller. Conclusions: The obtained results regarding the brain stem and cervical cord motion can be useful in the kinetic MRI examination of certain congenital disorders, degenerative diseases, and traumatic injuries of the craniovertebral junction and the cervical spine. (Folia Morphol 2016; 75, 4: 439–447)

• Wydawca: -
• Czasopismo: Folia Morphologica
• Rocznik: 2016
• Tom: 75
• Numer: 4
• Opis fizyczny: p.439-447,fig.,ref.

Twórcy

autor

Malis M.

• Institute of Anatomy, Faculty of Medicine, University of Belgrade, Belgrade, Serbia

autor

Georgievski B.

• Department of Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Clinic “Sveti Sava”, Faculty of Medicine, University of Belgrade, Belgrade, Serbia

autor

Milic I.

• Clinic of Neurosurgery, Faculty of Medicine, University of Belgrade, Belgrade, Serbia

autor

Mijatovic A.

• Department of Neuropsychiatry, City Hospital Zvezdara, Belgrade, Serbia

autor

Kovacevic V.

• Department of Cardiology, Clinical Centre of Serbia, Faculty of Medicine, University of Belgrade, Belgrade, Serbia

autor

Lazic D.

• Psychiatric Clinic “Laza Lazarević”, Institute of Anatomy, Faculty of Medicine, University of Belgrade, Subotic 4/2, 11000 Belgrade, Serbia

autor

Kapor S.

• Institute of Anatomy, Faculty of Medicine, University of Belgrade, Belgrade, Serbia

autor

Marinkovic S.

• Institute of Anatomy, Faculty of Medicine, University of Belgrade, Belgrade, Serbia

Bibliografia

• 1. Anderson PA, Sasso RC, Hipp J, Norvell DC, Raich A, Hashimoto R (2012) Kinematics of the cervical adjacent segments after disc arthroplasty compared with anterior discectomy and fusion: a systematic review and metaanalysis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 37(suppl): S85–S95.
• 2. Benglis D, Levi AD (2010) Neurologic findings of craniovertebral junction disease. Neurosurgery, 66 (suppl): A13–A21.
• 3. Bilston LE, Thibault LE (1996) The mechanical properties of the human cervical spinal cord in vitro. Ann Biomed Eng, 24: 67–74.
• 4. Board D, Stemper BD, Yoganandan N, Pintar FA, Shender B, Paskoff G (2006) Biomechanics of the aging spine. Biomed Sci Instrum, 42: 1–6.
• 5. D’Andrea K, Dreyer J, Fahim DK (2015) Utility of preoperative magnetic resonance imaging coregistered with intraoperative computed tomographic scan for the resection of complex tumors of the spine. World Neurosurg, 84: 1804–1815.
• 6. Dalbayrak S, Yaman O, Firidin MN, Yilmaz T, Yilmaz M (2015) The contribution of cervical dynamic magnetic resonance imaging to the surgical treatment of cervical spondylotic myelopathy. Turk Neurosurg, 25: 36–42.
• 7. Doursounian L, Alfonso JM, Iba-Zizen MT, Roger B, Cabanis EA, Meininger V, Pineau H (1989) Dynamics of the junction between the medulla and the cervical spinal cord: an in vivo study in the sagittal plane by magnetic resonance imaging. Surg Radiol Anat, 11: 313–322.
• 8. Endo K, Suzuki H, Nishimura H, Tanaka H, Shishido T, Yamamoto K (2014) Kinematic analysis of the cervical cord and cervical canal by dynamic neck motion. Asian Spine J, 8: 747–752.
• 9. Flanagan MF (2015) The role of the craniocervical junction in craniospinal hydrodynamics and neurodegenerative conditions. Neurol Res Int, ;2015:794829. doi:10.1155/2015/794829.
• 10. Gerigk L, Bostel T, Hegewald A, Thomé C, Scharf J, Groden C, Neumaier-Probst E (2012) Dynamic magnetic resonance imaging of the cervical spine with high-resolution 3-dimensional T2-imaging. Clin Neuroradiol, 22: 93–99.
• 11. Ghasemi A, Haddadi K, Shad AA (2015) Comparison of diagnostic accuracy of MRI with and without contrast in diagnosis of traumatic spinal cord injuries. Medicine (Baltimore), 94: e1942.
• 12. Hankinson TC, Anderson RCE (2010) Craniovertebral junction abnormalities in Down syndrome. Neurosurgery, 66 (suppl.): A32–A38.
• 13. Harrison DE, Cailliet R, Harrison DD, Troyanovich SJ, Harrison SO (1999a) A review of biomechanics of the central nervous system — part I: spinal canal deformations resulting from changes in posture. J Manipulative Physiol Ther, 22: 227–234.
• 14. Harrison DE, Cailliet R, Harrison DD, Troyanovich SJ, Harrison SO (1999b) A review of biomechanics of the central nervous system — part II: spinal cord strains from postural loads. J Manipulative Physiol Ther, 22: 322–332.
• 15. Hsu W, Wolinsky J-P, Gokaslan ZL, Sciubba DM (2010) Transoral approaches to the cervical spine. Neurosurgery, 66 (suppl.): A119–A125.
• 16. Ji S, Margulies SS (2007) In vivo pons motion within the skull. J Biomech, 40: 92–99.
• 17. Kakaria UK, Chang SW, Theodore N, Sonntag VKH (2010) Atlas fractures. Neurosurgery, 66 (suppl.): A60–A67.
• 18. Krauss WE, Bledsoe JM, Clarke MJ, Nottmeier EW, Pichelmann MA (2010) Rheumatoid arthritis of the craniovertebral junction. Neurosurgery, 66 (suppl.): A83–A95.
• 19. Kuwazawa Y, Bashir W, Pope MH, Takahashi K, Smith FW (2006a) Biomechanical aspects of the cervical cord: effects of postural changes in healthy volunteers using positional magnetic resonance imaging. J Spinal Disord Tech, 19: 348–352.
• 20. Kuwazawa Y, Pope MH, Bashir W, Takahashi K, Smith FW (2006b) The length of the cervical cord: effects of postural changes in healthy volunteers using positional magnetic resonance imaging. Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 31: E579–E583.
• 21. Lao LF, Zhong GB, Li QY, Liu ZD (2014) Kinetic magnetic resonance imaging analysis of spinal degeneration: a systematic review. Orthop Surg, 6: 294–299.
• 22. Lord EL, Alobaidan R, Takahashi S, Cohen JR, Wang CJ, Wang BJ, Wang JC (2014) Kinetic magnetic resonance imaging of he cervical spine: a review of the literature. Global Spine J, 4: 121–128.
• 23. Magu S, Singh D, Yadav RK, Bala M (2015) Evaluation of traumatic spine by magnetic resonance imaging and correlation with neurological recovery. Asian Spine J, 9: 748–756.
• 24. Martin MD, Bruner HJ, Maiman DJ (2010) Anatomic and biomechanical considerations of the craniovertebral junction. Neurosurgery, 66 (suppl.): A2–A6.
• 25. Mesfar W, Moglo K (2013) Effect of the transverse ligament rupture on the biomechanics of the cervical spine under a compressive loading. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon), 28: 846–852.
• 26. Miura J, Doita M, Miyata K, Marui T, Nishida K, Fujii M, Kurosaka M (2009) Dynamic evaluation of the spinal cord in patients with cervical spondylotic myelopathy using a kinematic magnetic resonance imaging technique. J Spinal Disord Tech, 22: 8–13.
• 27. Morishita Y, Falakassa J, Naito M, Hymanshon HJ, Taghavi C, Wang JC (2009) The kinematic relationships of the upper cervical spine. Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 34: 2642–2645.
• 28. Morishita Y, Hymanson H, Miyazaki M, Zhang HH, He W, Wu G, Kong MH, Wang JC (2008) Review article: Kinematic evaluation of the spine: a kinetic magnetic resonance imaging study. J Orthopaed Surg, 16: 348–350.
• 29. Moulding HD, Bilsky MH (2010) Metastases to the craniovertebral junction. Neurosurgery, 66 (suppl.): A113–A118.
• 30. Pryputniewicz DM, Hadley MN (2010) Axis fractures. Neurosurgery, 66(suppl): A68–A82.
• 31. Sayit E, Daubs MD, Aghdasi B, Montgomery SR, Inoue H, Wang CJ, Wang BJ, Phan KH, Scott TP (2013) Dynamic changes of the ligamentum flavum in the cervical spine assessed with kinetic magnetic resonance imaging. Global Spine J, 3: 69–74.
• 32. Schlamann M, Reischke L, Klassen D, Maderwald S, Böhner V, Kollia K, Ladd ME, Forsting M, Wanke I (2007) Dynamic magnetic resonance imaging of the cervical spine using the NeuroSwing system. Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 32: 2398–2401.
• 33. Sen C, Shrivastava R, Anwar S, Triana A (2010) Lateral transcondylar approach for tumors at the anterior aspect of the craniovertebral junction. Neurosurgery, 66 (suppl.): A104–A112.
• 34. Singh H, Harrop J, Schiffmacher P, Rosen M, Evans J (2010) Ventral surgical approaches to craniovertebral junction chordomas. Neurosurgery, 66 (suppl.): A96–A103.
• 35. Smith JS, Shaffrey CI, Abel MF, Menezes AH (2010) Basilar invagination. Neurosurgery, 66 (suppl.): A39–A47.
• 36. Steinmetz MP, Mroz TE, Benzel EC (2010) Craniovertebral junction: biomechanical considerations. Neurosurgery, 66 (suppl.): A7–A12.
• 37. Weintraub MI, Khoury A (1995) Critical neck position as an independent risk factor for posterior circulation stroke. A magnetic resonance angiographic analysis. J Neuroimaging, 5: 16–22.
• 38. Xiong C, Suzuki A, Daubs MD, Scott T, Phan K, Wang J (2015) The evaluation of cervical spine mobility without significant spondylosis by kMRI. Eur Spine J, 24: 2799–2806.
• 39. Yuan G, Dougherty L, Margulies SS (1998) In vivo human cervical spinal cord deformation and displacement in flexion. Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 23: 1677–1683.

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.5603/FM.a2016.0016