Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
The upper cervical spine represents quite a unique anatomy compared with other regions of the spine and displays a complicated combination of motions, including
flexion extension, lateral bending, and axial rotation. In
head rotation, the upper cervical spine offers a large
amount of axial rotation combined with lateral bending
and flexion extension, best known as coupled motions.
In vitro studies have previously been the only method for
obtaining quantitative data on three-dimensional (3D)
intervertebral motions.1 However, the lack of physiologic tonus of musculature makes the results of in vitro
study impractical.
In vivo 3D motions of the upper cervical spine have
remained largely unexplored. We have developed a
unique system for motion analysis and succeeded in determining in vivo coupled motions of the upper cervical
spine during head rotation. The purpose of this study
was to accurately demonstrate for the first time the in
vivo 3D intervertebral motions of the upper cervical
spine during rotation.
Materials and Methods
Study participants comprised 15 healthy volunteers (8 men, 7
women) with a mean age of 24.3 years (range, 2231 years).
None of these volunteers had neck pain or a medical history of
cervical disorders. The system of 3D motion analysis developed
in our laboratory (Virtual Place M series, Medical Imaging
Laboratory, Tokyo, Japan and Poly-editor, Division of Functional Diagnostic Imaging, Biomedical Research Center, Osaka
University Medical School) consists of the following steps: acquisition of 3D-magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), segmentation, voxel-based registration, and motion analysis, in which a
mathematical description of the motions and relative motions
of individual upper cervical spines was derived by computing
the rigid transformation required to superimpose the 3D MRI.
taken using a 1.0-T imager (Signa LX, General Electric, Milwaukee, WI). A torso phased array coil was settled in front and
behind the neck in order to receive more signals. The 3D images
were obtained using 3D-fast GRASS (gradient recalled acquisition in the steady state) pulse sequence (repetition time/echo
time, 8.0/3.3), 1.5 mm slice thickness, and no interslice gap.
The flip angle was 10, and a 24-cm field-of-view was used
(imaging matrix, 256 " 224). Imaging time was approximately
5 minutes for one position.
Subjects were placed supine on the MRI table and asked to
rotate their heads from neutral to maximum rotation in 15
steps (0, 15, 30, 45, 60, and maximum) while 3D images
were obtained for 11 positions. Subjects always rotated their
head on a plane perpendicular to the MRI table by keeping
E139
Voxel-Based Registration. Voxel-based registration represents a method for determining relative positions between volume images represented at different coordinates, using a corresponding method based on correlation between voxel values.
The correlation coefficient was used as a measure of similarity.
Using this method, a segmented 3D MRI of the vertebra in the
neutral position was superimposed over images for each position. Relative motion of the spine was then calculated by starting from initial transformation parameters and finally finding
the parameters allowing maximal correlation of the two images
(Figure 1).
Validation of Voxel-Based Registration Accuracy. The
accuracy of voxel-based registration for the cervical spine on
3D MRI underwent preliminary validation in in vivo experiments using phantom MRI. A phantom with markers, comprising four high precision ceramic balls, was attached to the head
through a diving mask and was used to determine gold standard positions. The phantom was scanned at various orientations, and all scans were registered to the reference scan. Translational and rotational errors were calculated for voxel-based
registration of the occiput, and the accuracy was validated with
reference to the root mean square distance calculated by corresponding marker sets. Mean absolute rotational error was
0.24 for flexion extension, 0.31 for lateral bending, and
0.43 for axial rotation. Mean absolute translational error was
0.52 mm for superoinferior translation, 0.51 mm for anteroposterior translation, and 0.41 mm for lateral translation.
Coordinate System. The absolute spatial coordinate system
in MRI space was defined as shown in Figure 2a. Motions of C1
Figure 2. A: Absolute spatial coordinate system. The positive xaxis is directed to the left, perpendicular to the sagittal plane. The
positive y-axis is directed superiorly, and the positive z-axis is
oriented anteriorly. B: Anatomic orthogonal coordinate system for
Oc and C1. The z-axis of Oc was parallel to the line connecting
anterior and posterior borders of the foramen magnum, with anterior considered positive. The y-axis was defined as perpendicular to the z-axis, with superior being positive. The x-axis was
positive to the left. Similar to Oc, the anatomic orthogonal coordinate system of C1 was defined using two points: the posteroinferior border of the anterior arch and the anteroinferior border of
the posterior arch. Origins were located at the anterior border of
the foramen magnum on Oc, and the posteroinferior border of the
anterior arch on C1.
and C2 in MRI space were measured using the absolute spatial
coordinate system.
The anatomic orthogonal coordinate systems of Oc and C1
were defined as described by Panjabi et al (Figure 2b).2 Relative
motions between Oc and C1 and between C1 and C2 were
measured on the anatomic orthogonal coordinate system and
described with 6 degrees of freedom by rigid body Euler angles
and translations.3
Results
Movement of C1 and C2 on the Absolute Spatial
Coordinate System
Movements of C1 and C2 on the absolute spatial coordinate system are given in Figure 3. The mean (! SD)
angle of axial rotation of the head from neutral to maximum was 72.1 ! 5.7 on the MRI coordinate system. At
maximum head rotation, mean axial rotations of C1 and
C2 to one side were 70.8 ! 5.6 and 34.2 ! 6.6, respectively. Coupled lateral bending of C1 (mean, 6.8 ! 4.1)
and C2 (mean, 11.3 ! 3.4) with axial rotation was
observed in the same direction as the axial rotation. Coupled flexion with axial rotation occurred at both C1
(mean, 6.0 ! 5.1) and C2 (mean, 5.7 ! 4.4), irrespective of direction of head rotation.
OcC1 and C1C2 Intervertebral Movement
Intervertebral movements at OcC1 and C1C2 are
shown in Figure 4. Mean axial rotation between Oc and
C1 was 1.7 ! 1.5 to each side. Coupled lateral bending
The in vivo kinematics of the cervical spine have predominantly been investigated using two-dimensional images
under conventional computed tomography (CT) and
MRI.6 8 These studies have only shown the magnitudes
of axial rotation, with no detailed descriptions of complex coupled motions. Biplanar radiography was the first
tool to indicate in vivo coupled motions.9,10 However,
the method was unreliable because of the large potential
for intraobserver and interobserver variability in tracking bony landmarks on plain radiographs.11 Furthermore, high doses of radiation make the analysis of continuous movements unfeasible using that method. Some
authors have used opto-electronic scanners tracking skin
markers with small infrared-emitting diodes.12 However, these methods failed to yield quantitative data because of discrepancies in the motions of skin markers and
the cervical spine.
Recently, some studies of in vivo 3D kinematics using
3D CT or 3D MRI have undertaken motion analyses of
foot and hand joints.1315 No previous studies of spine
kinematics have used such methods. Although 3D MRI
is inferior to 3D CT in accurate imaging of bone, we used
3D MRI in the present in vivo studies to avoid subject
exposure to radiation. Surface-based registration,16
which is a technique to register two rigid 3D surface bone
models, has previously been used for in vivo studies of
3D kinematics.1315 However, surface-based techniques
are not appropriate for 3D MRI, as the low resolution of
3D MRI complicates the extraction of exact bone contours. Conversely, voxel-based techniques allow registration by making use of relationships between voxel
intensities within images,17 and accuracy does not de-
Figure 4. Intervertebral movements at OcC1 (A and C) and C1C2 (B and D). Degree of head axial rotation was plotted on the x-axis,
whereas degree of rotational movement along each axis on anatomic orthogonal coordinate system and length of translational movement
at OcC1 or C1C2 was plotted on the y-axis. Approximate curves for movements were drawn.
Figure 5. Intervertebral movements at C1C2 viewed from posterior. In left rotation, right lateral bending and extension were
coupled. In right rotation, left lateral bending and extension were
coupled.
In vitro
Fick (1904)
Werne (1959)
W&P (1978)
Panjabi (1988)
In vivo
Dvorak (1987)
Penning (1987)
Iai (1989)
present study
Cadaver
Cadaver
Cadaver
Cadaver
CT
CT
Bi-plane x-ray
3 D MRI
C1C2
0
0
0
7.3
60
47
47
38.9
4
1
#4
1.7
41.5
40.5
38
36.3
Table 2. Comparison of Mean Ranges of Coupled Rotational Motion (Axial Rotation [AR], Lateral Bending [LB], and
FlexionExtension [FE]) on One Side ()
C0C1
Main AR
In vitro study
Panjabi et al (2001)
In vivo studies
Iai et al (1989)
Present study
Coupled LB
Coupled FE
Main AR
Coupled LB
Coupled FE
4.9
1.8
#11.7
28.4
3.1
#3.5
#4
1.7
4.1
#10
#13.4
38
36.3
11
3.8
#6.8
Cadaver
Bi-plane x-ray
3D MRI
C1C2
Coupled lateral bending ($) represents the opposite direction of axial rotation. Coupled flexion extension (#) represents extension.
Acknowledgment
The authors thank Ryoji Nakao for assistance in programming computer software, Mitsuhiro Shiotani for assistance in producing MRIs, and Sadayuki Miyatani for
assistance in producing the device for motion analysis.
Table 3. Comparison of Mean Ranges of Coupled Translational Motion (SuperoInferior [SI], Lateral [L], and
Anteroposterior [AP] Translation) on One Side (mm)
C0C1
In vitro study
Oda et al (1991)
In vivo study
Present study
C1C2
Modality
Coupled SI
Coupled L
Coupled AP
Cadaver
1.6
2.1
#0.3
3D MRI
1.5
2.1
0.7
Coupled SI
Coupled L
Coupled AP
0.7
4.9
#0.9
3.4
#0.3
Translation ($) represent superior for superoinferior, the same direction in the axial rotation for lateral, and anterior for anteroposterior.
References
1. Panjabi MM, Crisco JJ, Vasavada A, et al. Mechanical properties of the
human cervical spine as shown by three-dimensional load-displacement
curves. Spine. 2001;26:26922700.
2. Oda T, Panjabi MM, Crisco JJ. Three-dimensional translational movements
of the upper cervical spine. J Spinal Disorder. 1991;4:411 419.
3. Panjabi MM, Krag MH, Goel VK. A technique for measurement and description of three-dimensional six degree-of-freedom motion of a body joint with
an application to the human spine. J Biomech. 1981;14:447 460.
4. Lorensen W, Cline H. Marching cubes: a high resolution 3D surface construction algorithm. Comput Graph. 1987;21:163170.
5. Schroeder W, Martin K, Lorensen W. The Visualization Toolkit, 2nd ed.
Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 1997.
6. Dvorak J, Hayek J, Zehnder R. CT-functional diagnostics of the rotatory
instability of the upper cervical spine: 2. An evaluation on healthy adults and
patients with suspected instability. Spine. 1987;12:726 731.
7. Penning L, Wilmink JT. Rotation of the cervical spine. Spine. 1987;12:732738.
8. Karhu JO, Parkkola RK, Komu ME, et al. Kinematic magnetic resonance
imaging of the upper cervical spine using a novel positioning device. Spine.
1999;24:2046 2056.
9. Mimura M, Moriya H, Watanabe T, et al. Three-dimensional motion analysis of the cervical spine with special reference to the axial rotation. Spine.
1989;14:11351139.
10. Iai H, Moriya H, Goto S, et al. Three-dimensional motion analysis of the
upper cervical spine during axial rotation. Spine. 1993;18:2388 2392.
11. Bogduk N, Mercer S. Biomechanics of the cervical spine: I. Normal kinematics. Clin Biomech. 2000;15:633 648.
12. Roozmon P, Gracovetsky SA, Gouw GJ, et al. Examining motion in the
cervical spine: II. Characterization of coupled joint motion using an optoelectronic device to track skin markers. J Biomed Eng. 1993;15:1322.
13. Udupa JK, Hirsch BE, Hillstrom HJ, et al. Analysis of in vivo 3-D internal
kinematics of the joints of the foot. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng. 1998;45:1387
1396.
14. Crisco JJ, McGovern RD, Wolfe SW. Three-dimensional joint kinematics
using bone surface registration: a computer assisted approach with an application to the wrist joint in vivo. Medical Image Computing and ComputerAssisted Intervention. 1998;696 699.
15. Stindel E, Udupa JK, Hirsch BE, et al. An in vivo analysis of the motion of the
peri-talar joint complex based on MR imaging. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng.
2001;48:236 247.
16. Sugano N, Sasama T, Sato Y, et al. Accuracy evaluation of surface-based
registration methods in a computer navigation system for hip surgery performed through a posterolateral approach. Comput Aided Surg. 2001;6:
195203.
17. West J, Fitzpatrick M, Wang MY, et al. Retrospective intermodality registration techniques for images of the head: surface-based versus volumebased. IEEE Trans Med Imag. 1999;18:144 150.
18. Fick R. Handbuch der Anatomie und Mechanik der Gelenke. Jena, Germany: Verlag von Gustav Fischer, 1904.
19. Werne S. The possibilities of movement in the craniovertebral joints. Acta
Orthop Scand. 1959;28:165173.
20. White AA, Panjabi MM. The basic kinematics of the spine: a review of past
and current knowledge. Spine. 1978;3:1220.
21. Panjabi MM, Dvorak J, Duranceau J, et al. Three-dimensional movements of
the upper cervical spine. Spine. 1988;13:726 730.
22. Goel VK, Clark CR, Galles K, et al. Moment-rotation relationships of the
ligamentous occipito-atlanto-axial complex. J Biomech. 1988;21:673 680.
23. Lysell E. Motion in the cervical spine. Acta Orthop Scand Suppl. 1969;123:
1 61.
24. Henke W. Handbuch der Anatomie and Mechanik der Gelenke. Leipziga
and Heidelberg, C. F. Winter. 1863.
25. Goel VK, Winterbottom JM, Schulte KR, et al. Ligament laxity across C0C1-C2 complex: axial torque-rotation characteristics until failure. Spine.
1990;15:990 996.
26. Chang H, Gilbertson LG, Goel VK, et al. Dynamic response of the occipitoatlanto-axial (C0-C1-C2) complex in right axial rotation. J Orthop Res.
1992;10:446 453.