The Southern Medical Journal (SMJ) is the official, peer-reviewed journal of the Southern Medical Association. It has a multidisciplinary and inter-professional focus that covers a broad range of topics relevant to physicians and other healthcare specialists.

SMJ // Article

Original Article

Dynamic Weight-bearing Cervical Magnetic Resonance Imaging: Technical Review and Preliminary Results

Authors: Todd W. Vitaz, MD, Christopher B. Shields, MD, George H. Raque, MD, Stephen G. Hushek, PHD, Robert Moser, RT(R), Neil Hoerter, RT(R), Thomas M. Moriarty, MD, PHD

Abstract

Background: Conventional magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of complex cervical spine disorders may underestimate the magnitude of structural disease because imaging is performed in a nondynamic non-weight-bearing manner. Myelography provides additional information but requires an invasive procedure.


Methods: This was a prospective review of the first 20 upright weight-bearing cervical MRI procedures with patients in the flexed, neutral, and extended positions conducted in an open-configuration MRI unit.


Results: This technique clearly illustrated the changes in spinal cord compression, angulation, and spinal column alignment that occur during physiologic movements with corresponding changes in mid-sagittal spinal canal diameter (P < 0.05). Image quality was excellent or good in 90% of the cases.


Conclusions: Dynamic weight-bearing MRI provides an innovative method for imaging complex cervical spine disorders. This technique is noninvasive and has adequate image quality that may make it a good alternative to cervical myelography.

This content is limited to qualifying members.

Existing members, please login first

If you have an existing account please login now to access this article or view purchase options.

Purchase only this article ($25)

Create a free account, then purchase this article to download or access it online for 24 hours.

Purchase an SMJ online subscription ($75)

Create a free account, then purchase a subscription to get complete access to all articles for a full year.

Purchase a membership plan (fees vary)

Premium members can access all articles plus recieve many more benefits. View all membership plans and benefit packages.

References

1. Badami JP, Baker RA, Scholz FJ, et al. Outpatient metrizamide myelography: prospective evaluation of safety and cost effectiveness. Radiology 1986;158:175–177.
 
2. Peterman SB. Postmyelography headache: a review. Radiology 1996;200:765–770.
 
3. Skalpe IO. Adverse effects of water-soluble contrast media in myelography, cisternography and ventriculography: a review with special reference to metrizamide. Acta Radiol Suppl 1977;355:359–370.
 
4. Schmid MR, Stucki G, Duewell S, et al. Changes in cross-sectional measurements of the spinal canal and intervertebral foramina as a function of body position: in vivo studies on an open-configuration MR system. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1999;172:1095–1102.
 
5. Weishaupt D, Schmid MR, Zanetti M, et al. Positional MR imaging of the lumbar spine: does it demonstrate nerve root compromise not visible at conventional MR imaging?Radiology 2000;215:247–253.
 
6. Wildermuth S, Zanetti M, Duewell S, et al. Lumbar spine: quantitative and qualitative assessment of positional (upright flexion and extension) MR imaging and myelography. Radiology 1998;207:391–398.
 
7. Zamani AA, Moriarty T, Hsu L, et al. Functional MRI of the lumbar spine in erect position in a superconducting open-configuration MR system: preliminary results. J Magn Reson Imaging1998;8:1329–1333.
 
8. White AA III, Johnson RM, Panjabi MM, et al. Biomechanical analysis of clinical stability in the cervical spine. Clin Orthop 1975;109:85–96.
 
9. Koeller W, Muehlhaus S, Meier W, et al. Biomechanical properties of human intervertebral discs subjected to axial dynamic compression: influence of age and degeneration. J Biomech 1986;19:807–816.
 
10. Nachemson AL. Lumbar intradiscal pressure: experimental studies on post-mortem material. Acta Orthop Scand Suppl 1960;43:1–104.
 
11. Nachemson AL, Elfstrom G. Intravital dynamic pressure measurements in lumbar discs: a study of common movements, maneuvers and exercises. Scand J Rehabil Med Suppl 1970;1:1–40.
 
12. Wilke HJ, Neef P, Caimi M, et al. New in vivo measurements of pressures in the intervertebral disc in daily life. Spine 1999;24:755–762.
 
13. Allmann KH, Uhl M, Uhrmeister P, et al. Functional MR imaging of the cervical spine in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Acta Radiol 1998;39:543–546.
 
14. Bell GR, Stearns KL. Flexion-extension MRI of the upper rheumatoid cervical spine. Orthopedics1991;14:969–974.
 
15. Breig A, Turnbull I, Hassler O. Effects of mechanical stresses on the spinal cord in cervical spondylosis: a study on fresh cadaver material. J Neurosurg 1966;25:45–56.
 
16. Muhle C, Metzner J, Weinert D, et al. Classification system based on kinematic MR imaging in cervical spondylitic myelopathy. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 1998;19:1763–1771.
 
17. Muhle C, Metzner J, Weinert D, et al. Kinematic MR imaging in surgical management of cervical disc disease, spondylosis and spondylotic myelopathy. Acta Radiol 1999;40:146–153.
 
18. Muhle C, Weinert D, Falliner A, et al. Dynamic changes of the spinal canal in patients with cervical spondylosis at flexion and extension using magnetic resonance imaging. Invest Radiol 1998;33:444–449.
 
19. Muhle C, Wiskirchen J, Weinert D, et al. Biomechanical aspects of the subarachnoid space and cervical cord in healthy individuals examined with kinematic magnetic resonance imaging. Spine1998;23:556–567.
 
20. Schonstrom N, Lindahl S, Willen J, et al. Dynamic changes in the dimensions of the lumbar spinal canal: an experimental study in vitro. J Orthop Res 1989;7:115–121.