Article Figures & Data
Figures
- Fig 1.
Images from a 58-year-old woman with persistent back pain. The left lateromedial prolapsed intervertebral disk in the segment L2/3 is equally well visible in both ACT (A and C) and MSCT (B and D) images. ACT images in the left posterior oblique position are displayed as 3D-MIP (E) and 3D-VRT (F). G, The myelographic projection was derived by transferring the position of the 3D volume from the workstation to the C-arm. Hence, no additional fluoroscopy was necessary to determine the optimal angles for projection myelographies.
- Fig 2.
Images from a 62-year-old man with symptoms of spinal claudication. Coronal MPR planes of ACT (A) and MSCT (B) are of equal quality. C, A curved coronal reconstruction of the ACT provides an appropriate depiction of the segmental nerve roots.
- Fig 3.
MPR images from a 75-year-old woman with persistent back pain after multisegmental laminectomy. In the sagittal sections (A, ACT; B, MSCT), the relevant degenerative changes can be depicted equally well: ligamental hyperplasia in the segment L1/2, ventral osteochondrosis in the segment L2/3, and the slight listhesis in the segment L4/5. A, Note the loss of detail and the enhanced image noise in the ACT section at the level from L5 to S2 due to the high attenuation of contrast media in the thecal sac. The transverse sections through the vertebral body of L4 (C, ACT; D, MSCT) show the hypertrophic facet joints and the thecal sac herniating into the laminectomy site. Both techniques show a well-defined L4 nerve root of the right side and an increase of tissue around the L4 nerve root of the contralateral side.
Tables
Variable Very Good, n (%) Good, n (%) Moderate, n (%) Poor, n (%) Very Poor, n (%) Total, n (%) Overall impression ACT 46 (28.8) 79 (49.4) 7 (4.4) 27 (16.9) 1 (0.6) 160 (100) MSCT 90 (58.1) 47 (30.3) 4 (2.6) 11 (7.1) 3 (1.94) 155 (100) Contrast media distribution ACT 49 (30.6) 80 (50.0) 13 (8.1) 18 (11.3) 0 (0.0) 160 (100) MSCT 90 (58.1) 46 (29.7) 5 (3.2) 11 (7.1) 3 (1.9) 155 (100) Perceptibility of intervertebral disks ACT 22 (13.8) 17 (10.7) 9 (5.7) 77 (48.4) 35 (22.0) 160 (100) MSCT 55 (35.3) 60 (38.5) 15 (9.6) 25 (16.0) 0 (0.0) 155 (100) Perceptibility of bone structure ACT 26 (16.3) 71 (44.4) 10 (6.3) 50 (31.3) 3 (1.9) 160 (100) MSCT 117 (74.5) 34 (21.9) 2 (1.3) 2 (1.3) 0 (0.0) 155 (100) Delineation of the spinal canal ACT 71 (44.4) 76 (47.5) 3 (1.9) 10 (6.3) 0 (0.0) 160 (100) MSCT 128 (82.6) 26 (16.8) 0 (0.0) 1 (0.7) 0 (0.0) 155 (100) Delineation of spinal nerve roots ACT 35 (22.0) 60 (37.5) 13 (8.1) 46 (28.8) 6 (3.8) 160 (100) MSCT 87 (56.1) 50 (32.3) 8 (5.2) 10 (6.5) 0 (0.0) 155 (100) Diagnostic applicability ACT 30 (37.0) 36 (44.4) 4 (4.9) 10 (12.4) 1 (1.2) 81 (100) MSCT 48 (61.6) 28 (35.9) 1 (1.3) 1 (1.3) 0 (0.0) 78 (100) Note:—ACT indicates angiographic CT; MSCT, multisection CT.
Variable ACT, Mean κ Values ± SD MSCT, Mean κ Values ± SD P Overall impression 0.73 ± 0.06 0.78 ± 0.04 .117 Contrast media distribution 0.74 ± 0.05 0.65 ± 0.09 .059 Perceptibility of intervertebral disks 0.65 ± 0.22 0.69 ± 0.09 .689 Perceptibility of bone structure 0.64 ± 0.12 0.78 ± 0.05 .030 Delineation of the spinal canal 0.75 ± 0.05 0.78 ± 0.03 .172 Delineation of spinal nerve roots 0.66 ± 0.09 0.72 ± 0.03 .193 Diagnostic applicability 0.74 ± 0.06 0.75 ± 0.03 .826 Note:—ACT indicates angiographic CT; MSCT, multisection CT. Data are n = 6, except for “diagnostic applicability,” where n = 3 by Student t test.
Variable ACT, Mean κ Values ± SD MSCT, Mean κ Values ± SD P Overall impression 0.81 ± 0.05 0.73 ± 0.15 .454 Contrast media distribution 0.75 ± 0.02 0.79 ± 0.08 .533 Perceptibility of intervertebral disks 0.65 ± 0.26 0.68 ± 0.17 .875 Perceptibility of bone structure 0.74 ± 0.02 0.78 ± 0.02 .068 Delineation of the spinal canal 0.75 ± 0.08 0.78 ± 0.02 .659 Delineation of spinal nerve roots 0.74 ± 0.04 0.78 ± 0.03 .256 Note:—ACT indicates angiographic CT; MSCT, multisection CT. Data are n = 3 by Student t test.
