Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2009 Aug;30(7):1360-3.
doi: 10.3174/ajnr.A1594. Epub 2009 Apr 15.

Are C1-2 punctures for routine cervical myelography below the standard of care?

Affiliations

Are C1-2 punctures for routine cervical myelography below the standard of care?

D M Yousem et al. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2009 Aug.

Abstract

Background and purpose: Recently, the performance of C1-2 punctures for cervical myelography was challenged in a medicolegal proceeding as being below the standard of care. We sought to examine current neuroradiologic practices and opinions on the technique.

Materials and methods: An 11-question survey was sent to 120 program directors of neuroradiology via e-mail links regarding cervical myelography using a C1-2 puncture. Reminders were sent during a 2-month period before data were finalized.

Results: Eighty-five of 120 (71%) surveys were returned. In the previous year, 14.3% (12/85) of institutions had not performed a C1-2 puncture. Thirty-eight percent (32/85) had performed >or=6 in the same period. Seventy-nine percent (54/68 responding) favored a lumbar approach to cervical myelography, with 6% (4/68) having a predilection for a C1-2 puncture. Ninety-five percent (76/80 responding) thought that performing a C1-2 puncture for cervical myelography reflected the standard of care. Every institution except 1 had staff with expertise to perform C1-2 punctures, and 73% of the institutions teach their fellows the procedure. Ninety-three percent (78/84) of programs would perform a C1-2 puncture for thoracolumbar pathology if MR imaging was contraindicated and there was a contraindication such as a local wound infection precluding a lumbar puncture. Indications for a C1-2 approach included severe lumbar spinal stenosis, infection in the lumbar region, upper limit of the block to be delineated, technical issues preventing lumbar puncture, and the best assessment of the cervical region for myelographic films.

Conclusions: C1-2 puncture for cervical myelography, though currently not the most frequently performed method at most institutions, continues to be practiced and is considered within the standard of care by most neuroradiology programs across the country.

PubMed Disclaimer

Comment in

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Skalpe IO, Amundsen P. Thoracic and cervical myelography with metrizamide: clinical experiences with a water-soluble, non-ionic contrast medium. Radiology 1975;116:101–06 - PubMed
    1. Orrison WW, Eldevik OP, Sackett JF. Lateral C1–2 puncture for cervical myelography. Part III. Historical, anatomic, and technical considerations. Radiology 1983;146:401–08 - PubMed
    1. Orrison WW, Sackett JF, Amundsen P. Lateral C1–2 puncture for cervical myelography. Part II. Recognition of improper injection of contrast material. Radiology 1983;146:395–400 - PubMed
    1. Skalpe IO, Nakstad P. Myelography with iohexol (Omnipaque): a clinical report with special reference to the adverse effects. Neuroradiology 1988;30:169–74 - PubMed
    1. Skalpe IO. Cervical myelography. Radiology 1990;177:590–91 - PubMed

MeSH terms