AJR ARRS Member Benefits
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Wiener, M. D.
Right arrow Articles by Forsberg, D. A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Wiener, M. D.
Right arrow Articles by Forsberg, D. A.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?

American Journal of Roentgenology, Vol 155, 1037-1041, Copyright © 1990 by American Roentgen Ray Society


ARTICLES

Congenital absence of a cervical spine pedicle: clinical and radiologic findings

MD Wiener, S Martinez and DA Forsberg
Department of Radiology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC 27710.

Congenital absence of a cervical pedicle is an unusual disorder with potentially confusing clinical and radiologic manifestations. A review of the previously reported 42 cases as well as 13 new cases is presented. Congenital absence of a cervical pedicle was an incidental finding in 10 of the 55 total patients (age range, 3-65 years; mean 31 years). The remainder presented with an array of symptoms; the most common was cervical pain (31 patients), often after trauma (19/31). Neurologic examination was normal in the majority (65%) of patients. The most common neurologic finding, in an additional 19% of patients, was isolated diminished sensation in an upper extremity. Imaging included conventional radiographs, tomograms, myelograms, and CT. The typical radiologic triad of findings included (1) the false appearance of an enlarged neural foramen owing to the absent pedicle; (2) a dysplastic, dorsally displaced ipsilateral articular pillar and lamina; and (3) a dysplastic ipsilateral transverse process. The spectrum of this disorder also included absence of the ipsilateral pillar in four of 55 patients and absence of the entire ipsilateral neural arch in five of 55 patients. Other osseous anomalies were present in 28 (51%) of 55 cases. In 10 of 55 cases, initial misdiagnosis resulted in inappropriate therapy, with a poor clinical outcome after therapy in three cases. Conservative therapy was the only successful management in all cases in which follow-up information was available, with the exception of one patient who had partial improvement after surgery. Careful analysis of radiologic images and knowledge of the specific findings of absent cervical pedicle should decrease the potential for misdiagnosis and inappropriate, potentially harmful therapy.
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?





HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1990 by the American Roentgen Ray Society.