Skip to main content

Table 3 Comparison of the values of standard parameters between supine (CT-generated DRR) and standing (original EOS) positions by paired t-test

From: Difference in whole spinal alignment between supine and standing positions in patients with adult spinal deformity using a new comparison method with slot-scanning three-dimensional X-ray imager and computed tomography through digital reconstructed radiography

Parameters (°) position Image modality Mean Range (min/max) SD SE 95% CI*1 Type I
error (α)
T1-T12
kyphosis
supine CT 24.4 −2.2 / 44.7 10.9 2.2 19.8 / 29.0 0.8581
standing EOS 24.0 −6.8 / 56.2 15.5 3.2 17.5 / 30.5
T4-T12
kyphosis
supine CT 15.3 −10.3 / 35.7 11.1 2.3 10.7 / 20.0 0.1641
standing EOS 17.8 −10.6 / 45.8 14.5 3.0 11.7 / 24.0
L1-S1 LL*2 supine CT 33.1 −11 / 55.9 17.5 3.8 25.7 / 40.5 0.0002
standing EOS 21.8 −32.6 / 63.3 25.5 5.2 11.0 / 32.6
L1-L5 LL supine CT 18.9 −20.3 / 45.1 16.9 3.5 11.7 / 26.0 0.0010
standing EOS 8.5 −38.5 / 66.0 26.1 5.3 −2.5 / 19.5
SS*3 supine CT 34.1 11.1 / 48.5 10.5 2.2 29.7 / 38.6 0.0003
standing EOS 27.0 0 / 60.4 14.1 2.9 21.1 / 33.0
PT*4 supine CT 19.2 5.2 / 37 7.5 1.5 16.1 / 22.4 < 0.0001
standing EOS 30.7 3.8 / 48 10.6 2.2 26.2 / 35.2
PI*5 supine CT 53.4 32.2 / 68.1 9.2 1.9 49.5 / 57.3 0.0013
standing EOS 57.7 33.6 / 80.8 10.9 2.2 53.1 / 62.3
Cobb angle*6 supine CT 31.0 6.8 / 57 15.3 3.6 23.4 / 38.7 0.0001
standing EOS 39.5 12.2 / 74.2 20.1 4.7 29.5 / 49.4
Rotation*7 supine CT 11.7 0.1 / 25.0 7.6 1.8 8.0 / 15.5 0.0318
standing EOS 14.7 0.7 / 34.9 10.2 2.4 9.7 / 19.8
  1. *195% confidence interval
  2. *2Lumbar lordosis
  3. *3Sacral slope
  4. *4Pelvic tilt
  5. *5Pelvic incidence
  6. *6Cobb’s angle of major curve (°)
  7. *7Vertebral rotation of the apex in the major curve (°)
  8. Mean values with bold letters indicate statistically significance (p < 0.05) between supine (CT) and standing (EOS)