Publicação: Validation of cone-beam computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging of the porcine spine: a comparative study with multidetector computed tomography and anatomical specimens
Nenhuma Miniatura disponível
Data
2015-05-01
Orientador
Coorientador
Pós-graduação
Curso de graduação
Título da Revista
ISSN da Revista
Título de Volume
Editor
Elsevier B.V.
Tipo
Artigo
Direito de acesso
Acesso restrito
Resumo
BACKGROUND CONTEXT: New spinal interventions or implants have been tested on ex vivo or in vivo porcine spines, as they are readily available and have been accepted as a comparable model to human cadaver spines. Imaging-guided interventional procedures of the spine are mostly based on fluoroscopy or, still, on multidetector computed tomography (MDCT). Cone-beam computed tomography (CBCT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) are also available methods to guide interventional procedures. Although some MDCT data from porcine spines are available in the literature, validation of the measurements on CBCT and MRI is lacking.PURPOSE: To describe and compare the anatomical measurements accomplished with MDCT, CBCT, and MRI of lumbar porcine spines to determine if CBCT and MRI are also useful methods for experimental studies.STUDY DESIGN: An experimental descriptive-comparative study.METHODS: Sixteen anatomical measurements of an individual vertebra from six lumbar porcine spines (n=36 vertebrae) were compared with their MDCT, CBCT, and MRI equivalents. Comparisons were made for the absolute values of the parameters. RESULTS: Similarities were found in all imaging methods. Significant correlation (p<.05) was observed with all variables except those that included cartilaginous tissue from the end plates when the anatomical study was compared with the imaging methods.CONCLUSIONS: The CBCT and MRI provided imaging measurements of the lumbar porcine spines that were similar to the anatomical and MDCT data, and they can be useful for specific experimental research studies.
Descrição
Idioma
Inglês
Como citar
Spine Journal. New York: Elsevier Science Inc, v. 15, n. 5, p. 992-999, 2015.
