Kinetic magnetic resonance images (kMRIs) of 587 lumbar and 459 cervical spines of symptomatic patients in axially loaded, upright neutral (0°), flexion (40°), and extension (-20°) positions were evaluated. Imaging took 10 to 12 minutes to complete in each position. Cervical kinematics were significantly affected by intervertebral disc degeneration, cervical cord compression, and sagittal alignment of the cervical spine. kMRI was effective in diagnosing lumbar disc herniations that are often missed using conventional MRI. kMRI is effective for diagnosing, evaluating, and managing degenerative disease or injury within the spine.
YuWDWilliamsSL. Spinal imaging: Radiographs, computed tomography, and magnetic resonance imaging. In: SpivakJMConnollyPJ, editors. Orthopaedic knowledge update: Spine 3. AAOS2006;6:57–67.
3.
ChenJSolingerABPoncetJFLantsCA. Meta-analysis of normative cervical motion. Spine1999;24:1571–8.
4.
Demaille-WlodykaSChiquetCLavasteJFSkalliWRevelMPoiraudeauS. Cervical range of motion and cephalic kinesthesis: Ultrasonographic analysis by age and sex. Spine2007;32:E254–61.
5.
ReitmanCAMauroKMNguyenLZieglerJMHippJA. Intervertebral motion between flexion and extension in asymptomatic individuals. Spine2004;29:2832–43.
6.
FrobinWLeivsethGBiggemannMBrinckmannP. Sagittal plane segmental motion of the cervical spine. A new precision measurement protocol and normal motion data of healthy adults. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon)2002;17:21–31.
7.
DvirZGal-EshelNShamirBPrushanskyTPevznerEPeretzC. Cervical motion in patients with chronic disorders of the cervical spine: A reproducibility study. Spine2006;31:E394–9.
8.
LeeHNicholsonLLAdamsRD. Cervical range of motion associations with subclinical neck pain. Spine2004;29:33–40.
9.
HagenKBHarms-RingdahlKEngerNOHedenstadRMortenH. Relationship between subjective neck disorders and cervical spine mobility and motion-related pain in male machine operators. Spine1997;22:1501–7.
10.
KettlerARohlmannFNeidlinger-WilkeCWernerKClaesLWilkeHJ. Validity and interobserver agreement of a new radiographic grading system for intervertebral disc degeneration. Part II. Cervical spine. Eur Spine J2006;15:732–41.
11.
BennekerLMHeiniPFAndersonSEAliniMItoK. Correlation of radiographic and MRI parameters to morphological and biochemical assessment of intervertebral disc degeneration. Eur Spine J2005;14:27–35.
12.
LuomaKVehmasTRiihimakiHRaininkoR. Disc height and signal intensity of the nucleus pulposus on magnetic resonance imaging as indicators of lumbar disc degeneration. Spine2001;26:680–6.
13.
PfirrmannCWMetzdorfAZanettiMHodlerJBoosN. Magnetic resonance classification of lumbar intervertebral disc degeneration. Spine2001;26:1873–8.
14.
MiyazakiMHongSWYoonSHZouJTowBAlanayA. Kinematic analysis of the relationship between the grade of disc degeneration and motion unit of the cervical spine. Spine2008;33:187–93.
15.
MorishitaYHidaSMiyazakiMHongSWZouJWeiF. The effects of the degenerative changes in the functional spinal unit on the kinematics of the cervical spine. Spine2008;33:E178–82.
16.
MiyazakiMHymansonHJMorishitaYHeWZhangHWuG. Kinematic analysis of the relationship between sagittal alignment and disc degeneration in the cervical spine. Spine2008;33:E870–6.
17.
ZouJYangHMiyazakiMWeiFHongSWYoonSH. Missed lumbar disc herniations diagnosed with kinetic magnetic resonance imaging. Spine;2008:33;E140–4.
18.
AvinashGPIoannisNGLeonardIV. Biomechanics of the spine. In: SpivakJMConnollyPJ, editors. Orthopaedic knowledge update: Spine 3. AAOS2006;3:25–32.
