Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
European Spine Journal
Published in: European Spine Journal 5/2009

01-05-2009 | Review Article

A review of methods for quantitative evaluation of spinal curvature

Authors: Tomaž Vrtovec, Franjo Pernuš, Boštjan Likar

Published in: European Spine Journal | Issue 5/2009

Login to get access

Abstract

The aim of this paper is to provide a complete overview of the existing methods for quantitative evaluation of spinal curvature from medical images, and to summarize the relevant publications, which may not only assist in the introduction of other researchers to the field, but also be a valuable resource for studying the existing methods or developing new methods and evaluation strategies. Key evaluation issues and future considerations, supported by the results of the overview, are also discussed.
Literature
1.
2.
Alanay A, Pekmezci M, Karaeminogullari O, Acaroglu E, Yazici M, Cil A, Pijnenburg B, Genc Y, Oner F (2007) Radiographic measurement of the sagittal plane deformity in patients with osteoporotic spinal fractures evaluation of intrinsic error. Eur Spine J 16:2126–2132. doi:10.​1007/​s00586-007-0474-z PubMedCrossRef
3.
Allen S, Parent E, Khorasani M, Hill D, Lou E, Raso J (2008) Validity and reliability of active shape models for the estimation of Cobb angle in patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. J Digit Imaging 21:208–218. doi:10.​1007/​s10278-007-9026-7 PubMedCrossRef
4.
André B, Dansereau J, Labelle H (1992) Effect of radiographic landmark identification errors on the accuracy of three-dimensional reconstruction of the human spine. Med Biol Eng Comput 30:569–575. doi:10.​1007/​BF02446787 PubMedCrossRef
5.
6.
Aubin C, Dansereau J, Parent F, Labelle H, de Guise J (1997) Morphometric evaluations of personalised 3D reconstructions and geometric models of the human spine. Med Biol Eng Comput 35:611–618. doi:10.​1007/​BF02510968 PubMedCrossRef
7.
8.
Beekman C, Hall V (1979) Variability of scoliosis measurement from spinal roentgenograms. Phys Ther 59:764–765PubMed
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
Carman D, Browne R, Birch J (1990) Measurement of scoliosis and kyphosis radiographs: intraobserver and interobserver variation. J Bone Joint Surg Am 72:328–333PubMed
14.
15.
Chen YL, Chen WJ, Chiou WK (2007) An alternative method for measuring scoliosis curvature. Orthopedics 30:828–831PubMed
16.
17.
18.
19.
Cobb J (1948) Outline for the study of scoliosis. Am Acad Orthop Surg Instr Course Lect 5:261–275
20.
21.
De Carvalho A, Vialle R, Thomsen L, Amzallag J, Cluzel G, Pointe H, Mary P (2007) Reliability analysis for manual measurement of coronal plane deformity in adolescent scoliosis. Are 30 × 90 cm plain films better than digitized small films? Eur Spine J 16:1615–1620. doi:10.​1007/​s00586-007-0437-4
22.
De Smet A, Goin J, Asher M, Scheuch H (1982) A clinical study of the differences between the scoliotic angles measured on posteroanterior and anteroposterior radiographs. J Bone Joint Surg Am 64:489–493
23.
De Smet A, Tarlton M, Cook L, Fritz S, Dwyer S (1980) A radiographic method for three-dimensional analysis of spinal configuration. Radiology 137:343–348PubMed
24.
Diab K, Sevastik J, Hedlund R, Suliman I (1995) Accuracy and applicability of measurement of the scoliotic angle at the frontal plane by Cobb’s method, by Ferguson’s method and by a new method. Eur Spine J 4:291–295. doi:10.​1007/​BF00301037 PubMedCrossRef
25.
Dimar JII, Carreon L, Labelle H, Djurasovic M, Weidenbaum M, Brown C, Roussouly P (2008) Intra- and inter-observer reliability of determining radiographic sagittal parameters of the spine and pelvis using a manual and a computer-assisted methods. Eur Spine J 17:1373–1379. doi:10.​1007/​s00586-008-0755-1 PubMedCrossRef
26.
Drerup B, Hierholzer E (1992) Evaluation of frontal radiographs of scoliotic spines—part I: measurement of position and orientation of vertebrae and assessment of clinical shape parameters. J Biomech 25:1357–1362. doi:10.​1016/​0021-9290(92)90291-8 PubMedCrossRef
27.
Drerup B, Hierholzer E (1996) Assessment of scoliotic deformity from back shape asymmetry using an improved mathematical model. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon) 11:376–383. doi:10.​1016/​0268-0033(96)00025-3
28.
Dumas R, Blanchard B, Carlier R, de Loubresse C, Le Huec JC, Marty C, Moinard M, Vital JM (2008) A semiautomated method using interpolation and optimisation for the 3D reconstruction of the spine from bi-planar radiography: a precision and accuracy study. Med Biol Eng Comput 46:85–92. doi:10.​1007/​s11517-007-0253-3 PubMedCrossRef
29.
Dutton K, Jones T, Slinger B, Scull E, O’Connor J (1989) Reliability of the Cobb angle index derived by traditional and computer assisted methods. Australas Phys Eng Sci Med 12:16–23PubMed
30.
Facanha-Filho F, Winter R, Lonstein J, Koop S, Novacheck T, L’Heureux E, Noren C (2001) Measurement accuracy in congenital scoliosis. J Bone Joint Surg Am 83:42–45PubMed
31.
Ferguson A (1930) The study and treatment of scoliosis. South Med J 23:116–120
32.
Fon G, Pitt M, Thies A (1980) Thoracic kyphosis: range in normal subjects. AJR Am J Roentgenol 134:979–983PubMed
33.
34.
35.
36.
Greenspan A, Pugh J, Norman A, Norman R (1978) Scoliotic index: a comparative evaluation of methods for the measurement of scoliosis. B Hosp Jt Dis Ort 39:117–125
37.
Gross C, Gross M, Kuschner S (1983) Error analysis of scoliosis curvature measurement. B Hosp Jt Dis Ort 43:171–177
38.
Gstoettner M, Sekyra K, Walochnik N, Winter P, Wachter R, Bach C (2007) Inter- and intra-observer reliability assessment of the Cobb angle: manual versus digital measurement tools. Eur Spine J 16:1587–1592. doi:10.​1007/​s00586-007-0401-3 PubMedCrossRef
39.
40.
41.
Harrison DD, Cailliet R, Janik T, Troyanovich S, Harrison DE, Holland B (1998) Elliptical modeling of the sagittal lumbar lordosis and segmental rotation angles as a method to discriminate between normal and low back pain subjects. J Spinal Disord 11:430–439. doi:10.​1097/​00002517-199810000-00010 PubMedCrossRef
42.
43.
44.
Harrison DD, Harrison DE, Janik T, Cailliet R, Ferrantelli J, Haas J, Holland B (2004) Modeling of the sagittal cervical spine as a method to discriminate hypolordosis: results of elliptical and circular modeling in 72 asymptomatic subjects, 52 acute neck pain subjects, and 70 chronic neck pain subjects. Spine 29:2485–2492. doi:10.​1097/​01.​brs.​0000144449.​90741.​7c PubMedCrossRef
45.
Harrison DE, Janik T, Harrison DD, Cailliet R, Harmon S (2002) Can the thoracic kyphosis be modeled with a simple geometric shape? The results of circular and elliptical modeling in 80 asymptomatic patients. J Spinal Disord 15:213–220
46.
47.
48.
49.
Ishihara A (1968) Roentgenographic studies on the normal pattern of the cervical curvature. Nippon Seikeigeka Gakkai Zasshi 42:1033–1044. (in Japanese)
50.
51.
Jeffries B, Tarlton M, De Smet A, Dwyer S, Brower A (1980) Computerized measurement and analysis of scoliosis: a more accurate representation of the shape of the curve. Radiology 134:381–385PubMed
52.
53.
54.
Labelle H, Dansereau J, Bellefleur C, Jéquier J (1995) Variability of geometric measurements from three-dimensional reconstructions of scoliotic spines and rib cages. Eur Spine J 4:88–94. doi:10.​1007/​BF00278918 PubMedCrossRef
55.
56.
Loder R, Urquhart A, Steen H, Graziano G, Hensinger R, Schlesinger A, Schork M, Shyr Y (1995) Variability in Cobb angle measurements in children with congenital scoliosis. J Bone Joint Surg Br 77:768–770PubMed
57.
58.
Mitton D, Landry C, Véron S, Skalli W, Lavaste F, De Guise J (2000) 3D reconstruction method from biplanar radiography using non-stereocorresponding points and elastic deformable meshes. Med Biol Eng Comput 38:133–139. doi:10.​1007/​BF02344767 PubMedCrossRef
59.
Mitulescu A, Semaan I, De Guise J, Leborgne P, Adamsbaum C, Skalli W (2001) Validation of the non-stereo corresponding points stereoradiographic 3D reconstruction technique. Med Biol Eng Comput 39:152–158. doi:10.​1007/​BF02344797 PubMedCrossRef
60.
Mok J, Berven S, Diab M, Hackbarth M, Hu S, Deviren V (2008) Comparison of observer variation in conventional and three digital radiographic methods used in the evaluation of patients with adolescent idiopathic scoliosis. Spine 33:681–686. doi:10.​1097/​BRS.​0b013e318178e67f​ PubMedCrossRef
61.
Morrissy R, Goldsmith G, Hall E, Kehl D, Cowie G (1990) Measurement of the Cobb angle on radiographs of patients who have scoliosis: evaluation of intrinsic error. J Bone Jt Surg Am 72:320–327
62.
Oda M, Rauh S, Gregory P, Silverman F, Bleck E (1982) The significance of roentgenographic measurement in scoliosis. J Pediatr Orthop 2:378–382PubMed
63.
64.
65.
66.
Peng Z, Zhong J WeeW, Lee JH (2005) Automated vertebra detection and segmentation from the whole spine MR images. In: Zhang Y, Xu L, Roux C, Zhuang T, Tamura T, Galiana H (eds), Proceedings of the 27th annual international conference of the engineering in medicine and biology society (EMBS)—EMBC 2005. IEEE, Shanghai, China, pp 2527–2530
67.
68.
69.
70.
71.
72.
73.
74.
75.
76.
77.
78.
Saraste H, Ostman A (1986) Stereophotogrammetry in the evaluation of the treatment of scoliosis. Int Orthop 10:63–67PubMed
79.
80.
81.
82.
83.
Singer K, Edmondston S, Day R, Breidahl W (1994) Computer-assisted curvature assessment and Cobb angle determination of the thoracic kyphosis: an in vivo and in vitro comparison. Spine 19:1381–1384PubMedCrossRef
84.
Singer K, Jones T, Breidahl P (1990) A comparison of radiographic and computer-assisted measurements of thoracic and thoracolumbar sagittal curvature. Skeletal Radiol 19:21–26. doi:10.​1007/​BF00197923 PubMedCrossRef
85.
86.
Stokes I (1994) Three-dimensional terminology of spinal deformity: a report presented to the Scoliosis Research Society by the Scoliosis Research Society Working Group on 3-D terminology of spinal deformity. Spine 19:236–248PubMedCrossRef
87.
88.
89.
90.
91.
92.
93.
Tang F-h, Chan L, H-p Lau, P-y Tsui, C-w Cheung (2008) Computer-generated index for evaluation of idiopathic scoliosis in digital chest images: a comparison with digital measurement. J Digit Imaging 21:S113–S120. doi:10.​1007/​s10278-007-9050-7 CrossRef
94.
Tayyab N, Samartzis D, Altiok H, Shuff C, Lubicky J, Herman J, Khanna N (2007) The reliability and diagnostic value of radiographic criteria in sagittal spine deformities: comparison of the vertebral wedge ratio to the segmental Cobb angle. Spine 32:E451–E459. doi:10.​1097/​BRS.​0b013e3180ca7d2d​ PubMedCrossRef
95.
96.
Troyanovich S, Harrison DE, Harrison DD, Holland B, Janik T (1998) Further analysis of the reliability of the posterior tangent lateral lumbar radiographic mensuration procedure: concurrent validity of computer-aided X-ray digitization. J Manip Physiol Ther 21:460–467
97.
98.
99.
Verdonck B, Nijlunsing R, Gerritsen F, Cheung J, Wever D, Veldhuizen A, Devillers S, Makram-Ebeid S (1998) Computer assisted quantitative analysis of deformities of the human spine. In: Wells W, Colchester A, Delp S (eds) Lecture Notes in Computer Science (LNCS): Proceedings of the 1st international conference on medical image computing and computer-assisted intervention, MICCAI’98, Springer, Cambridge, MA, USA, vol 1496, pp 822–831
100.
Vialle R, Levassor N, Rillardon L, Templier A, Skalli W, Guigui P (2005) Radiographic analysis of the sagittal alignment and balance of the spine in asymptomatic subjects. J Bone Jt Surg Am 87:260–267. doi:10.​2106/​JBJS.​D.​02043 CrossRef
101.
Voutsinas S, MacEwen G (1986) Sagittal profiles of the spine. Clin Orthop Relat Res 210:235–242PubMed
102.
103.
104.
105.
106.
Wambolt A, Spencer D (1987) A segmental analysis of the distribution of lumbar lordosis in the normal spine. Orthop Trans 11:92–93
107.
108.
109.
Metadata
Title
A review of methods for quantitative evaluation of spinal curvature
Authors
Tomaž Vrtovec
Franjo Pernuš
Boštjan Likar
Publication date
01-05-2009
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
European Spine Journal / Issue 5/2009
Print ISSN: 0940-6719
Electronic ISSN: 1432-0932
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-009-0913-0

Other articles of this Issue 5/2009

European Spine Journal 5/2009 Go to the issue

Original Article

Management of intramedullary spinal cord abscess: experience with four cases, pathophysiology and outcomes

Abstracts

XXXII Italian Spine Society National Congress Baia Samuele – Punta Sampieri, Ragusa 21–23 May, 2009 ABSTRACTS

Original Article

Comparison between anterior cervical discectomy fusion and cervical corpectomy fusion using titanium cages for reconstruction: analysis of outcome and long-term follow-up

Original Article

Minimum 2-year outcome of cervical laminoplasty with deep extensor muscle-preserving approach: impact on cervical spine function and quality of life

Original Article

Mid- to long-term outcome of instrumented anterior cervical fusion for subaxial injuries

Original Article

Lumbar lordosis in osteoporosis and in osteoarthritis