A 3D subject-specific model of the spinal subarachnoid space with anatomically realistic ventral and dorsal spinal cord nerve rootlets

Table 3 Review of studies that include volumetric quantification of anatomic regions within the spine using MR imaging

Source	Region	SC (cm³)	NR (cm³)	SSS (cm³)	N	Mean age	Segmentation method	Subject type
Current study (Sass et al. (2017))	Full spine	19.9	5.8	97.3	1	23	Manual	Healthy
Hogan et al. [38]	Full spine	–	–	107^a	2	35	Manual	Healthy
Edsbagge et al. [39]	Full spine	20	–	81 ± 13	22	70	Semi-automated	Healthy elderly
Bagci et al. [43]	Full spine	–	–	86	1	–	Automated	Idiopathic intracranial hypertension
Hsu et al. [40]	Full spine	–	–	122	1	29	Manual	Healthy
Lebret et al. [44]	Full spine	–	–	99 ± 27	6	70.2	Automated	Non-communicating hydrocephalus
Lebret et al. [44]	Full spine			80 ± 28	12	54.5^b	Automated	Healthy
Lebret et al. [44]	Full spine	–	–	65 ± 18	20	43.8^b	Automated	Communicating hydrocephalus
Alperin et al. [41]	Full spine	21.0	–	78 ± 8	8	29	Automated	Obese women only
Levi Chazen et al. [42]	Full spine	–	–	84 ± 15	15	39	Automated	Healthy
Current study (Sass et al. (2017))	Lumbosacral	3.8	4.0	51.0	1	23	Manual
Hogan et al. [38]	Lumbosacral	–	7.31	49.9	25	35	Manual
Carpenter et al. [47]	Lumbosacral	–	–	53.7^a	41	33	Manual
Higuchi et al. [48]	Lumbosacral	–	–	41.7^a	41	30	Manual
Sullivan et al. [45]	Lumbosacral	–	–	35.8	71	48	Automated
Edsbagge et al. [39]	Lumbosacral	–	13	25	22	70	Semi-automated
Martyr et al. [46]	Lumbosacral	–	9.2	31.8	16	72	Automated
Puigdellivol et al. [49] , [87]	Lumbosacral	–	–	34.4	7	37	Semi-automated
Prats Galino et al. [50]	Lumbosacral	–	10.4	34.3	7	38	Semi-automated
Hsu et al. [40]	Lumbosacral	–	–	53.0	1	29	Manual

ISSN: 2045-8118