Abstract:
The pioneering work of Elsberg & Dyke (1934) and later reports by Landmesser &
Heublein (1953), Verbiest (1954, 1955), Simril & Thurston (1955), Schwarz (1956),
Hinck, Clark & Hopkins (1966) have established the clinical value of measurements
of interpedicular distances in the diagnosis of narrowing of the spinal canal. Verbiest
(1954) pointed out that the bony canal could be developmentally narrow, whilst
Scheslinger & Taveras (1953) and Verbiest (1954, 1955) described some of the
effects of the narrow canal. Since then, the size of the spinal canal has attracted
increasing interest. Various techniques, including plain radiographs, myelography,
epidural venography, computed tomography and diagnostic ultrasound, have
been used to measure the size of the lumbar spinal canal (Hinck et al. 1966; Kirkaldy-
Willis, Paine, Cauchoix & Mclvor, 1974; Gargano, Jacobson & Rosomoff, 1974;
Eisenstein, 1977; Sheldon, Sersland & Leborgne, 1977; Chynn, Altman, Shaw &
Finby, 1978; Porter, Wicks & Ottewell, 1978; Bestawros, Vreeland & Goldman,
1979). Although each technique has its own limitations, Chynn et al. (1978) observed
that plain radiographs are of great value in the diagnosis of lumbar spinal canal
stenosis.
