Assessment of sacral doming in lumbosacral spondylolisthesis. 2007

Jean-Marc Mac-Thiong, and Hubert Labelle, and Stefan Parent, and Benoit Poitras, and Alain Jodoin, and Jean Ouellet, and Luc Duong
Division of Orthopedic Surgery, CHU Sainte-Justine, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.

METHODS Quantitative versus subjective evaluation of sacral doming in lumbosacral spondylolisthesis. OBJECTIVE To evaluate the relevance of the Spinal Deformity Study Group (SDSG) index in the assessment of sacral doming and to propose a quantitative criterion to differentiate between significant and nonsignificant doming. BACKGROUND There is no consensus on the optimal technique to assess sacral doming, although it is an important feature in spondylolisthesis. METHODS Five spinal surgeons subjectively assessed the sacral endplate of 100 subjects (34 high-grade spondylolisthesis, 50 low-grade spondylolisthesis, 16 controls) from lateral radiographs. Subjects were classified by each surgeon as having significant or nonsignificant sacral doming. An independent observer quantitatively evaluated sacral doming for all subjects using the SDSG index. A criterion to differentiate significant from nonsignificant sacral doming was sought, based on the comparison between the subjective assessment of surgeons and the quantitative evaluation by the independent observer. Intrarater and interrater reliability of the SDSG index was evaluated using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). RESULTS Intrarater and interrater ICCs for the SDSG index were excellent at 0.91 and 0.88, respectively. Sacral doming evaluated with the SDSG index was 11.6% +/- 5.0% (range, 1.5%-18.9%), 16.4% +/- 6.3% (range, 3.7%-35.6%), and 27.9% +/- 10.9% (range, 5.7%-56.9%) for controls, low-grade, and high-grade cases, respectively. Overall intersurgeon agreement on the significance of sacral doming was substantial at 88% (kappa = 0.72). With a threshold value of 25% for the SDSG index, 93% of concordance was found between the quantitative evaluation using the SDSG index and the multisurgeons subjective assessment. CONCLUSIONS This study confirms the relevance of the SDSG index to assess sacral doming in lumbosacral spondylolisthesis. The authors propose a criterion of 25% to differentiate significant from nonsignificant sacral doming using the SDSG index. Such a criterion will allow more accurate assessment of sacral remodeling, especially for borderline cases, and facilitate comparisons between studies.

UI MeSH Term Description Entries
D008161 Lumbosacral Region Region of the back including the LUMBAR VERTEBRAE, SACRUM, and nearby structures. Lumbar Region,Lumbar Regions,Lumbosacral Regions,Region, Lumbar,Region, Lumbosacral,Regions, Lumbar,Regions, Lumbosacral
D011857 Radiographic Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted Computer systems or networks designed to provide radiographic interpretive information. Computer Assisted Radiographic Image Interpretation,Computer-Assisted Radiographic Image Interpretation,Radiographic Image Interpretation, Computer Assisted
D006801 Humans Members of the species Homo sapiens. Homo sapiens,Man (Taxonomy),Human,Man, Modern,Modern Man
D012447 Sacrum Five fused VERTEBRAE forming a triangle-shaped structure at the back of the PELVIS. It articulates superiorly with the LUMBAR VERTEBRAE, inferiorly with the COCCYX, and anteriorly with the ILIUM of the PELVIS. The sacrum strengthens and stabilizes the PELVIS. Sacra,Sacral Vertebra,Sacral Vertebrae,Sacrums,Vertebra, Sacral,Vertebrae, Sacral
D012720 Severity of Illness Index Levels within a diagnostic group which are established by various measurement criteria applied to the seriousness of a patient's disorder. Illness Index Severities,Illness Index Severity
D013168 Spondylolisthesis Forward displacement of a superior vertebral body over the vertebral body below. Olisthesis,Spondylisthesis,Olistheses,Spondylistheses,Spondylolistheses
D015203 Reproducibility of Results The statistical reproducibility of measurements (often in a clinical context), including the testing of instrumentation or techniques to obtain reproducible results. The concept includes reproducibility of physiological measurements, which may be used to develop rules to assess probability or prognosis, or response to a stimulus; reproducibility of occurrence of a condition; and reproducibility of experimental results. Reliability and Validity,Reliability of Result,Reproducibility Of Result,Reproducibility of Finding,Validity of Result,Validity of Results,Face Validity,Reliability (Epidemiology),Reliability of Results,Reproducibility of Findings,Test-Retest Reliability,Validity (Epidemiology),Finding Reproducibilities,Finding Reproducibility,Of Result, Reproducibility,Of Results, Reproducibility,Reliabilities, Test-Retest,Reliability, Test-Retest,Result Reliabilities,Result Reliability,Result Validities,Result Validity,Result, Reproducibility Of,Results, Reproducibility Of,Test Retest Reliability,Validity and Reliability,Validity, Face
D015588 Observer Variation The failure by the observer to measure or identify a phenomenon accurately, which results in an error. Sources for this may be due to the observer's missing an abnormality, or to faulty technique resulting in incorrect test measurement, or to misinterpretation of the data. Two varieties are inter-observer variation (the amount observers vary from one another when reporting on the same material) and intra-observer variation (the amount one observer varies between observations when reporting more than once on the same material). Bias, Observer,Interobserver Variation,Intraobserver Variation,Observer Bias,Inter-Observer Variability,Inter-Observer Variation,Interobserver Variability,Intra-Observer Variability,Intra-Observer Variation,Intraobserver Variability,Inter Observer Variability,Inter Observer Variation,Inter-Observer Variabilities,Inter-Observer Variations,Interobserver Variabilities,Interobserver Variations,Intra Observer Variability,Intra Observer Variation,Intra-Observer Variabilities,Intra-Observer Variations,Intraobserver Variabilities,Intraobserver Variations,Observer Variations,Variabilities, Inter-Observer,Variabilities, Interobserver,Variabilities, Intra-Observer,Variabilities, Intraobserver,Variability, Inter-Observer,Variability, Interobserver,Variability, Intra-Observer,Variability, Intraobserver,Variation, Inter-Observer,Variation, Interobserver,Variation, Intra-Observer,Variation, Intraobserver,Variation, Observer,Variations, Inter-Observer,Variations, Interobserver,Variations, Intra-Observer,Variations, Intraobserver,Variations, Observer
D017410 Practice Guidelines as Topic Works about directions or principles presenting current or future rules of policy for assisting health care practitioners in patient care decisions regarding diagnosis, therapy, or related clinical circumstances. The guidelines may be developed by government agencies at any level, institutions, professional societies, governing boards, or by the convening of expert panels. The guidelines form a basis for the evaluation of all aspects of health care and delivery. Clinical Guidelines as Topic,Best Practices,Best Practice

Related Publications

Jean-Marc Mac-Thiong, and Hubert Labelle, and Stefan Parent, and Benoit Poitras, and Alain Jodoin, and Jean Ouellet, and Luc Duong
May 2014, European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society,
Jean-Marc Mac-Thiong, and Hubert Labelle, and Stefan Parent, and Benoit Poitras, and Alain Jodoin, and Jean Ouellet, and Luc Duong
December 2002, Neurosurgery,
Jean-Marc Mac-Thiong, and Hubert Labelle, and Stefan Parent, and Benoit Poitras, and Alain Jodoin, and Jean Ouellet, and Luc Duong
September 2005, Skeletal radiology,
Jean-Marc Mac-Thiong, and Hubert Labelle, and Stefan Parent, and Benoit Poitras, and Alain Jodoin, and Jean Ouellet, and Luc Duong
October 1963, La Presse medicale,
Jean-Marc Mac-Thiong, and Hubert Labelle, and Stefan Parent, and Benoit Poitras, and Alain Jodoin, and Jean Ouellet, and Luc Duong
January 1971, Revue de chirurgie orthopedique et reparatrice de l'appareil moteur,
Jean-Marc Mac-Thiong, and Hubert Labelle, and Stefan Parent, and Benoit Poitras, and Alain Jodoin, and Jean Ouellet, and Luc Duong
March 1981, Australasian radiology,
Jean-Marc Mac-Thiong, and Hubert Labelle, and Stefan Parent, and Benoit Poitras, and Alain Jodoin, and Jean Ouellet, and Luc Duong
February 2019, World neurosurgery,
Jean-Marc Mac-Thiong, and Hubert Labelle, and Stefan Parent, and Benoit Poitras, and Alain Jodoin, and Jean Ouellet, and Luc Duong
January 2016, Surgical neurology international,
Jean-Marc Mac-Thiong, and Hubert Labelle, and Stefan Parent, and Benoit Poitras, and Alain Jodoin, and Jean Ouellet, and Luc Duong
December 1984, The British journal of radiology,
Jean-Marc Mac-Thiong, and Hubert Labelle, and Stefan Parent, and Benoit Poitras, and Alain Jodoin, and Jean Ouellet, and Luc Duong
July 2021, Clinics in sports medicine,
Copied contents to your clipboard!