THE ETIOLOGY OF SEPARATE NEURAL ARCH
- 1 January 1953
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Wolters Kluwer Health in Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery
- Vol. 35 (1), 102-110
- https://doi.org/10.2106/00004623-195335010-00010
Abstract
1. All well documented embryological and foetal studies within recent years have failed to demonstrate a defect suggesting separation of the neural arch. There is therefore no proof that the lesion is congenital. 2. Attempts to produce separation of the neural arch by manipulation of stillborn infants have failed; thus birth injury is not believed to be a significant cause. Paucity of the lesion in young children supports this contention. 3. Examination of a large series of skeletons has shown that the incidence of the defect does not increase during the age period from about twenty to eighty years. 4. Roentgenograms of a series of children have revealed an incidence of defects mid-way between the frequency in the adult and the total absence at birth. This is a suggestive but not a conclusive finding, because the number of subjects was too small to yield statistically significant results.This publication has 6 references indexed in Scilit:
- The incidence of separate neural arch and coincident bone variations. A survey of 4,200 skeletonsThe Anatomical Record, 1951
- Anomalous centers of ossification for inferior articular processes of the lumbar vertebraeThe Anatomical Record, 1951
- Ossification and growth of the human maxilla, premaxilla and palate boneThe Anatomical Record, 1949
- The developmental anatomy of the human osseous skeleton during the embryonic, fetal and circumnatal periodsThe Anatomical Record, 1944
- SpondylolisthesisThe British Journal of Radiology, 1933
- Incidence of separate neural arch in the lumbar vertebrae of EskimosAmerican Journal of Physical Anthropology, 1931