Radiographic evaluation of ventral instability in lumbar spondylolisthesis: do we need extension radiographs in routine exams?

How Does the Slump Sitting Radiograph Increase Proportion of Segmental Instability and Kyphotic Alignment of Lumbar Degenerative Spondylolisthesis?

OBJECTIVE

Clinical and radiographic degenerative spondylolisthesis (CARDS) classification was proposed to differentiate homogenous lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis (LDS) subgroups. The sitting radiograph exhibited lumbar malalignment with maximum lumbar kyphosis, intervertebral kyphosis, and spondylolisthesis.This study aimed to assess the sitting radiograph for distribution of clinical and radiographic degenerative spondylolisthesis classification, and to elucidate its significance for exhibiting kyphotic alignment (CARDS type D) and segmental instability.

METHODS

A cohort of 101 patients with symptomatic lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis (LDS) between September 2018 and December 2020 were recruited. The distribution and relibility of CARDS classification with or without sitting radiograph was assessed. The translational and angular range of motion and segmental instability was also evaluated. Univariate analysis of variance was used for multiple groups, and the least significant difference for two groups. Kappa consistency test of intrarater and interrater was evaluated for CARDS classification with or without sitting radiograph. Chi-square test was used to compare paried categorical data.

RESULTS

Utility of sitting radiographs for CARDS classification revealed higher percentage of type D than that without the sitting radiograph (p < 0.001). The sitting radiograph revealed a larger slip distance than the flexion radiograph (p = 0.003), as well as a lower slip angle than flexion radiograph (p < 0.001). The sitting-supine modality demonstrated the largest translational range of motion compared to the sitting-extension (p < 0.001) and flexion-extension modalities (p < 0.001). The sitting-supine modality showed larger angular range of motion than the flexion-extension modality (p < 0.001). The percentage of flexion, extension, upright, supine, and sitting radiograph to identify translational instability was higher than that without sitting radiograph (p < 0.001), as well as taking angular motion ≥10° as an additional criterion for segmental instability (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

The CARDS classification was reliable for LDS. The sitting radiograph showed maximal slip distance and kyphotic slip angle. Application of the sitting radiograph was necessary for evaluating segmental instability and kyphotic alignment of LDS.

How Do Standing Neutral, Supine Lateral, Standing Flexion, and Standing Extension Radiographs Compare in Detecting the Presence and Magnitude of Stable and Dynamic Spondylolisthesis?

BACKGROUND

Clinical guidelines recommend standing radiographs as the most appropriate imaging for detecting degenerative spondylolisthesis, although reliable evidence about the standing position is absent. To our knowledge, no studies have compared different radiographic views and pairings to detect the presence and magnitude of stable and dynamic spondylolisthesis.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

(1) What is the percentage of new patients presenting with back or leg pain with stable (3 mm or greater listhesis on standing radiographs) and dynamic (3 mm or greater listhesis difference on standing-supine radiographs) spondylolisthesis? (2) What is the difference in the magnitude of spondylolisthesis between standing and supine radiographs? (3) What is the difference in the magnitude of dynamic translation among flexion-extension, standing-supine, and flexion-supine radiographic pairs?

METHODS

This cross-sectional, diagnostic study was performed at an urban, academic institution between September 2010 and July 2016; 579 patients 40 years or older received a standard radiographic three-view series (standing AP, standing lateral, and supine lateral radiographs) at a new patient visit. Of those individuals, 89% (518 of 579) did not have any of the following: history of spinal surgery, evidence of vertebral fracture, scoliosis greater than 30°, or poor image quality. In the absence of a reliable diagnosis of dynamic spondylolisthesis using this three-view series, patients may have had flexion and extension radiographs, and approximately 6% (31 of 518) had flexion and extension radiographs. A total of 53% (272 of 518) of patients were female, and the patients had a mean age of 60 ± 11 years. Listhesis distance (in mm) was measured by two raters as displacement of the posterior surface of the superior vertebral body in relation to the posterior surface of the inferior vertebral body from L1 to S1; interrater and intrarater reliability, assessed with intraclass correlation coefficients, was 0.91 and 0.86 to 0.95, respectively. The percentage of patients with and the magnitude of stable spondylolisthesis was estimated on and compared between standing neutral and supine lateral radiographs. The ability of common pairs of radiographs (flexion-extension, standing-supine, and flexion-supine) to detect dynamic spondylolisthesis was assessed. No single radiographic view or pair was considered the gold standard because stable or dynamic listhesis on any radiographic view is often considered positive in clinical practice.

RESULTS

Among 518 patients, the percentage of patients with spondylolisthesis was 40% (95% CI 36% to 44%) on standing radiographs alone, and the percentage of patients with dynamic spondylolisthesis was 11% (95% CI 8% to 13%) on the standing-supine pair. Standing radiographs detected greater listhesis than supine radiographs did (6.5 ± 3.9 mm versus 4.9 ± 3.8 mm, difference 1.7 mm [95% CI 1.2 to 2.1 mm]; p < 0.001). Among 31 patients, no single radiographic pairing identified all patients with dynamic spondylolisthesis. The listhesis difference detected between flexion-extension was no different from the listhesis difference detected between standing-supine (1.8 ± 1.7 mm versus 2.0 ± 2.2 mm, difference 0.2 mm [95% CI -0.5 to 1.0 mm]; p = 0.53) and flexion-supine (1.8 ± 1.7 mm versus 2.5 ± 2.2 mm, difference 0.7 mm [95% CI 0.0 to 1.5]; p = 0.06).

CONCLUSION

This study supports current clinical guidelines that lateral radiographs should be obtained with patients in the standing position, because all cases of stable spondylolisthesis of 3 mm or greater were detected on standing radiographs alone. Each radiographic pair did not detect different magnitudes of listhesis, and no single pair detected all cases of dynamic spondylolisthesis. Clinical concern for dynamic spondylolisthesis may justify standing neutral, supine lateral, standing flexion, and standing extension views. Future studies could identify and evaluate a set of radiographic views that provides the greatest capacity to diagnose stable and dynamic spondylolisthesis.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, diagnostic study.

Utility of Seated Lateral Radiographs in the Diagnosis and Classification of Lumbar Degenerative Spondylolisthesis

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

PURPOSE

Our goal was to determine which radiographic images are most essential for degenerative spondylolisthesis (DS) classification and instability detection.

OVERVIEW OF LITERATURE

The heterogeneity in DS requires multiple imaging views to evaluate vertebral translation, disc space, slip angle, and instability. However, there are several restrictions on frequently used imaging perspectives such as flexion-extension and upright radiography.

METHODS

We assessed baseline neutral upright, standing flexion, seated lateral radiographs, and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for patients identified with spondylolisthesis from January 2021 to May 2022 by a single spine surgeon. DS was classified by Meyerding and Clinical and Radiographic Degenerative Spondylolisthesis classifications. A difference of >10° or >8% between views, respectively, was used to characterize angular and translational instability. Analysis of variance and paired chi-square tests were utilized to compare modalities.

RESULTS

A total of 136 patients were included. Seated lateral and standing flexion radiographs showed the greatest slip percentage (16.0% and 16.7%), while MRI revealed the lowest (12.2%, p <0.001). Standing flexion and lateral radiographs when seated produced more kyphosis (4.66° and 4.97°, respectively) than neutral upright and MRI (7.19° and 7.20°, p <0.001). Seated lateral performed similarly to standing flexion in detecting all measurement parameters and categorizing DS (all p >0.05). Translational instability was shown to be more prevalent when associated with seated lateral or standing flexion than when combined with neutral upright (31.5% vs. 20.2%, p =0.041; and 28.1% vs. 14.6%, p =0.014, respectively). There were no differences between seated lateral or standing flexion in the detection of instability (all p >0.20).

CONCLUSIONS

Seated lateral radiographs are appropriate alternatives for standing flexion radiographs. Films taken when standing up straight do not offer any more information for DS detection. Rather than standing flexion-extension radiographs, instability can be detected using an MRI, which is often performed preoperatively, paired with a single seated lateral radiograph.

Comparison of the results of open PLIF versus UBE PLIF in lumbar spinal stenosis: postoperative adjacent segment instability is lesser in UBE

OBJECTIVE

To compare the difference in efficacy between open PLIF and UBE for lumbar spinal stenosis and the effect on postoperative adjacent segment instability.

METHOD

The clinical data of 37 patients with PLIF and 32 patients with UBE for lumbar spinal stenosis were retrospectively analyzed to compare the differences in perioperative conditions and short- and medium-term outcomes.

RESULTS

All 69 patients completed the surgery successfully. The operating time, number of intraoperative fluoroscopies and hospital days were higher in the UBE group than in the open PLIF group. Intraoperative bleeding and postoperative drainage were lower than in the open PLIF group (P < 0.05). The visual analogue scale (VAS) of low back pain was lower in the UBE group than in the open PLIF group at 1 month and 3 months postoperatively (P < 0.05), and there were no statistically significant VAS scores for low back pain in the two groups at 1 day and 6 months postoperatively (P > 0.05). Leg pain VAS scores were lower in the UBE group than in the open PLIF group at 1 month, 3 months and 6 months postoperatively (P < 0.05), and leg pain VAS scores were not statistically significant in both groups at 1 day postoperatively (P > 0.05). The ODI index was lower in the UBE group than in the open PLIF group at 1 day and 1 month postoperatively (P < 0.05) and was not statistically significant in the two groups at 3 months and 6 months postoperatively (P > 0.05). There was no statistically significant difference between the two groups in postoperative interbody height, sagittal diameter of the spinal canal, efficacy of modified MacNab and interbody fusion (P > 0.05). The open PLIF group was more prone to postoperative adjacent vertebral instability than the UBE group, and the difference was statistically significant (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

With appropriate indications, the open PLIF group and the UBE group had similar short- and medium-term clinical outcomes for the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis, but patients in the UBE group had better symptomatic improvement than the open PLIF group at 3 months postoperatively, and the effect on postoperative adjacent vertebral instability was smaller in the endoscopic group than in the open PLIF group.

Intermodal Detection of Lumbar Instability in Degenerative Spondylolisthesis is Superior to Functional Radiographs

Purpose

In this study, we compare different imaging modalities to find the most sensitive and efficient way of detecting instability in lumbar spondylolisthesis.

Methods

Patients presenting with spondylolisthesis from June 01, 2018 to May 31, 2020 with functional radiographs and either CT scans or MRI images were included in our single-center retrospective cohort study. The amount of translation, in millimeters, was measured on supine MRI images, CT scans, and radiographs of inclination while sitting, standing, or prone and reclination while standing using the Meyerding technique. The amount of translation was compared among the different modalities.

Results

A total of 113 patients with spondylolisthesis on 125 vertebral levels were included in this study. The mean patient age was 73.52 ± 12.59 years; 69 (60.5%) patients were females. The most affected level was L4/5 (62.4%), followed by L3/4 (16%) and L5/S1 (13.6%). The average translations measured on supine CT were 4.13 ± 5.93 mm and 4.42 ± 3.49 mm on MRI (p = 0.3 for the difference between MRI and CT). The difference of inclination while sitting radiograph to slice imaging was 3.37 ± 3.64 mm (p < 0.0001), inclination while standing to slice imaging was 2.67 ± 3.03 mm (p < 0.0001), reclination while standing to slice imaging was 1.6 ± 3.15 mm (p = 0.03), and prone to slice imaging was 2.19 ± 3.02 mm (p = 0.03).

Conclusion

We found that a single radiograph in either inclination, reclination, or prone position compared to a CT scan or an MRI image in supine position can detect instability in spondylolisthesis more efficiently than comparison of functional radiographs in any position.

Pain Control Affects the Radiographic Diagnosis of Segmental Instability in Patients with Degenerative Lumbar Spondylolisthesis

BACKGROUND

Diagnosing intervertebral instability is crucial for the treatment of degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis (DLS). Disabling back pain will reduce spinal mobility which leads to an underestimate of the incidence of intervertebral instability. We hypothesized that adequate analgesia could alter the flexion/extension exam performance, and thus increase the diagnostic accuracy of segmental instability.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

One hundred patients with low-grade DLS were prospectively enrolled in the before-after cohort study. Standing lateral flexion/extension radiographs of lumbar spines were examined and analyzed before and after intramuscular injections of 30 mg ketorolac.

RESULTS

Pain score decreased significantly after analgesic injections (p < 0.001). Dynamic slip (DS), dynamic segmental angle (DA), dynamic lumbar lordosis, and slip percentage (SP) were significantly increased after pain reduction (all p < 0.001). According to the diagnostic criteria for segmental instability (DS > 4.5 mm, DA > 15°, or SP > 15%), there were 4%, 4%, and 0.7% of total motion segments fulfilling the criteria which markedly increased to 42%, 32%, and 16.7% after analgesia was administered. The incidence of instability also increased from 6% to 38% after analgesia.

CONCLUSIONS

The diagnosis rate of intervertebral instability is commonly underestimated in the presence of low back pain. This short-term pain relief facilitates reliable functional imaging adding to the diagnosis of intervertebral instability.

Utility of Natural Sitting Lateral Radiograph in the Diagnosis of Segmental Instability for Patients with Degenerative Lumbar Spondylolisthesis

BACKGROUND

Segmental instability in patients with degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis is an indication for surgical intervention. The most common method to evaluate segmental mobility is lumbar standing flexion-extension radiographs. Meanwhile, other simple radiographs, such as standing upright radiograph, a supine sagittal magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) or supine lateral radiograph, or a slump or natural sitting lateral radiograph, have been reported to diagnose segmental instability. However, those common posture radiographs have not been well characterized in one group of patients. Therefore, we measured slip percentage in a group of patients with degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis using radiographs of patients in standing upright, natural sitting, standing flexion, and standing extension positions as well as supine MRI.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

We asked: (1) Does the natural sitting radiograph have a larger slip percentage than the standing upright or standing flexion radiograph? (2) Does the supine sagittal MRI reveal a lower slip percentage than the standing extension radiograph? (3) Does the combination of the natural sitting radiograph and the supine sagittal MRI have a higher translational range of motion (ROM) and positive detection rate of translational instability than traditional flexion-extension mobility using translational instability criteria of greater than or equal to 8%?

METHODS

We retrospectively performed a study of 62 patients (18 men and 44 women) with symptomatic degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis at L4 who planned to undergo a surgical intervention at our institution between September 2018 and June 2019. Each patient underwent radiography in the standing upright, standing flexion, standing extension, and natural sitting positions, as well as MRI in the supine position. The slip percentage was measured three times by single observer on these five radiographs using Meyerding's technique (intraclass correlation coefficient 0.88 [95% CI 0.86 to 0.90]). Translational ROM was calculated by absolute values of difference between two radiograph positions. Based on the results of comparison of slip percentage and translational ROM, we developed the diagnostic algorithm to evaluate segmental instability. Also, the positive rate of translational instability using our diagnostic algorithms was compared with traditional flexion-extension radiographs.

RESULTS

The natural sitting radiograph revealed a larger mean slip percentage than the standing upright radiograph (21% ± 7.4% versus 17.7% ± 8.2%; p < 0.001) and the standing flexion radiograph (21% ±7.4% versus 18% ± 8.4%; p = 0.002). The supine sagittal MRI revealed a lower slip percentage than the standing extension radiograph (95% CI 0.49% to 2.8%; p = 0.006). The combination of natural sitting radiograph and the supine sagittal MRI had higher translational ROM than the standing flexion and extension radiographs (10% ± 4.8% versus 5.4% ± 3.7%; p < 0.001). More patients were diagnosed with translational instability using the combination of natural sitting radiograph and supine sagittal MRI than the standing flexion and extension radiographs (61% [38 of 62] versus 19% [12 of 62]; odds ratio 3.9; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Our results indicate that a sitting radiograph reveals high slip percentage, and supine sagittal MRI demonstrated a reduction in anterolisthesis. The combination of natural sitting and supine sagittal MRI was suitable to the traditional flexion-extension modality for assessing translational instability in patients with degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, diagnostic study.

Flexion-extension standing radiographs underestimate instability in patients with single-level lumbar spondylolisthesis: comparing flexion-supine imaging may be more appropriate

BACKGROUND

Generally, most spine surgeons agree that increased segmental motion viewed on flexion-extension radiographs is a reliable predictor of instability; however, these views can be limited in several ways and may underestimate the instability at a given lumbar segment.

METHODS

Consecutively collected adult (≥18 years old) patients with symptomatic single-level lumbar spondylolisthesis were reviewed from a two-surgeon database from 2015 to 2019. Routine standing lumbar X-rays (neutral, flexion, extension) and supine lumbar MRI (sagittal T2-weighted imaging sequence) were performed. Patients were excluded if they had prior lumbar surgery, missing radiographic data, or if the time between X-rays and MRI was >6 months.

RESULTS

All 39 patients with symptomatic, single-level lumbar spondylolisthesis were identified. The mean age was 57.3±16.7 years and 66% were female. There was good intra- and inter-rater reliability agreement between measured values on the presence of instability. The slip percentage (SP) difference was significantly highest in the flexion-supine (FS) (5.7 mm, 12.3%) and neutral standing-supine (NS) (4.3 mm, 8.7%) groups, both of which were significantly higher compared with the flexion-extension (FE) group (1.8 mm, 4.5%, P<0.001). Ventral instability based on SP >8% was observed more frequently in FS (79.5%) and NS (52.6%) groups compared with FE group (16.7%, P<0.001). No statistically significant correlation was found between SP and disc angle for all radiographic views.

CONCLUSIONS

Comparing standing lateral and flexion X-rays with supine MRIs provides higher sensitivity to assess instability than standard flexion-extension radiographs. The FS and NS comparisons also show greater slip percentage differences at higher slip grades, but not at different lumbar levels. These changes are not dependent on age or gender.

Predicting spondylolisthesis correction with prone traction radiographs

Aims

To determine the effectiveness of prone traction radiographs in predicting postoperative slip distance, slip angle, changes in disc height, and lordosis after surgery for degenerative spondylolisthesis of the lumbar spine.

Methods

A total of 63 consecutive patients with a degenerative spondylolisthesis and preoperative prone traction radiographs obtained since 2010 were studied. Slip distance, slip angle, disc height, segmental lordosis, and global lordosis (L1 to S1) were measured on preoperative lateral standing radiographs, flexion-extension lateral radiographs, prone traction lateral radiographs, and postoperative lateral standing radiographs. Patients were divided into two groups: posterolateral fusion or posterolateral fusion with interbody fusion.

Results

The mean changes in segmental lordosis and global lordosis were 7.1° (SD 6.7°) and 2.9° (SD 9.9°) respectively for the interbody fusion group, and 0.8° (SD 5.1°) and -0.4° (SD 10.1°) respectively for the posterolateral fusion-only group. Segmental lordosis (ρ = 0.794, p < 0.001) corrected by interbody fusion correlated best with prone traction radiographs. Global lumbar lordosis (ρ = 0.788, p < 0.001) correlated best with the interbody fusion group and preoperative lateral standing radiographs. The least difference in slip distance (-0.3 mm (SD 1.7 mm), p < 0.001), slip angle (0.9° (SD 5.2°), p < 0.001), and disc height (0.02 mm (SD 2.4 mm), p < 0.001) was seen between prone traction and postoperative radiographs. Regression analyses suggested that prone traction parameters best predicted correction of slip distance (Corrected Akaike’s Information Criterion (AICc) = 37.336) and disc height (AICc = 58.096), while correction of slip angle (AICc = 26.453) was best predicted by extension radiographs. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) cut-off showed, with 68.3% sensitivity and 64.5% specificity, that to achieve a 3.0° increase in segmental lordotic angle, patients with a prone traction disc height of 8.5 mm needed an interbody fusion.

Conclusion

Prone traction radiographs best predict the slip distance and disc height correction achieved by interbody fusion for lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis. To achieve this maximum correction, interbody fusion should be undertaken if a disc height of more than 8.5 mm is attained on preoperative prone traction radiographs. Level of Evidence: Level II Prognostic Study Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2020;102-B(8):1062–1071.

Do We Have Adequate Flexion-extension Radiographs for Evaluating Instability in Patients With Lumbar Spondylolisthesis?

STUDY DESIGN

A retrospective cohort study of consecutive patients.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate whether adequate flexion-extension was acquired in standard functional radiographs in lumbar spondylolisthesis.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

In lumbar spondylolisthesis, flexion-extension radiographs taken in the standing position are most commonly used to evaluate spinal instability. However, these functional radiographs occasionally depend on the patient's effort and cooperation, they can provide different results.

METHODS

This study included 92 consecutive patients diagnosed with L4-5 degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis. We analyzed the flexion-extension radiographs taken with the patient being led by the hand (LH) and those taken without LH (NLH). Sagittal translation (ST), segmental angulation (SA), posterior opening (PO), and lumbar lordosis (LL) were measured on functional radiographs taken in both tests. Then, ST, SA, PO, detection rate of instability, and LL observed in LH were compared with those observed in NLH. Furthermore, the correlation of the difference was evaluated between ST, lumbar angulation, and LL.

RESULTS

A relative value of ST was 9.5% ± 4.3% in LH and 5.6% ± 3.3% in NLH, which differed significantly (P < 0.001). SA and PO were also significantly greater in LH than in NLH. The detection rate of instability was 71.7% in LH and 30.4% in NLH (P < 0.001). LL measurement on flexion showed 17.6° ± 13.5° in LH and 28.2° ± 12.2° in NLH, which differed significantly (P < 0.001). However, no significant difference was found in LL on extension between LH and NLH. There was a moderate correlation between the difference of ST, SA, PO, and LL on flexion.

CONCLUSION

Flexion with physical assistance was useful for the detection of abnormal lumbar mobility. Taking radiation exposure into consideration, physical assistance such as using a table in front of a patient could lead the similar evaluation of the segmental instability.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

2.

IMAGE CORRELATION BETWEEN FACET EFFUSION AND LUMBAR INSTABILITY

ABSTRACT Objective To assess the incidence of facet effusion in lumbosacral spine magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and the relationship with radiographic segmental instability in patients submitted to spinal surgery. Methods Retrospective cohort study of patients submitted to lumbosacral spine surgery over a period of three years, through the evaluation of dynamic radiographs (X-ray) motion and facet effusion in axial section of MRI. Instability was defined as vertebral translation > 3 mm or intervertebral angle > 10º, and facet effusion as fluid in the facet joints > 1.5 mm. Results The total number of patients that fulfilled the criteria for analysis was 244, of which 47 presented movement (≤ 3 mm) and 31 presented excessive movement (> 3 mm), 115 had facet effusion (≤ 1.5 mm) and 46 presented excessive fluid (> 1.5 mm). Statistical analysis did not demonstrate a significant association between increased segmental movement and facet effusion (p = 0.150). Conclusions The total incidence of facet effusion was 47.1% and the excessive fluid was 18.9%.There was no association between facet effusion in MRI and instability in dynamic X-ray. MRI does not replace dynamic X-ray in flexion and extension in the evaluations of lumbar instability. Level of evidence III; Retrospective Cohort.

Utility of Supine Lateral Radiographs for Assessment of Lumbar Segmental Instability in Degenerative Lumbar Spondylolisthesis

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective chart review OBJECTIVE.: To determine whether supine lateral radiographs increase the amount of segmental instability visualized in single-level lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis, when compared to traditional lateral flexion-extension radiographs. We hypothesized that supine radiographs increase the amount of segmental instability seen in single-level lumbar spondylolisthesis when compared to flexion-extension.

SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA

Accurate evaluation of segmental instability is critical to the management of lumbar spondylolisthesis. Standing flexion-extension lateral radiographs are routinely obtained, as it is believed to precipitate the forward-backward motion of the segment; however, recent studies with magnetic resonance imaging and computed tomography have shown that the relaxed supine position can facilitate the reduction of the anterolisthesed segment. Here, we show that inclusion of supine lateral radiographs increases the amount of segmental instability seen in single-level lumbar spondylolisthesis when compared to traditional lateral radiographs.

METHODS

Supine lateral radiographs were added to the routine evaluation (standing neutral/flexion/extension lateral radiographs) of symptomatic degenerative spondylolisthesis at our institution. In this retrospective study, 59 patients were included. The amount of listhesis was measured and compared on each radiograph: standing neutral lateral ("neutral"), standing flexion lateral ("flexion"), standing extension lateral ("extension"), and supine lateral ("supine").

RESULTS

A total of 59 patients (51 women, 8 men), with a mean age of 63.0 years (±9.85 yr) were included. The mean mobility seen with flexion-extension was 5.53 ± 4.11. The mean mobility seen with flexion-supine was 7.83% ± 4.67%. This difference was significant in paired t test (P = 0.00133), and independent of age and body mass index. Maximal mobility was seen between flexion and supine radiographs in 37 patients, between neutral and supine radiographs in 11 cases, and between traditional flexion-extension studies in 11 cases.

CONCLUSION

Supine radiograph demonstrates more reduction in anterolisthesis than the extension radiograph. Incorporation of a supine lateral radiograph in place of extension radiograph can improve our understanding of segmental mobility when evaluating degenerative spondylolisthesis.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

3.

Current concept in upright spinal MRI

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is the established technique for evaluating the spine. Unfortunately, the supine position of the patient during conventional MRI scanning does not truly reflect the physiological forces experienced by the discoligamentous structures during normal upright posture and ambulation. Upright MRI is a relatively new technique that allows the patient to be scanned in several different weight-bearing positions, which may potentially demonstrate occult pathology not visualised in the supine position. The imaging technique and current clinical indications of upright spinal MRI would be discussed.