1naresh
Array ( [urn:ac.highwire.org:guest:identity] => Array ( [runtime-id] => urn:ac.highwire.org:guest:identity [type] => guest [service-id] => ajnr-ac.highwire.org [access-type] => Controlled [privilege] => Array ( [urn:ac.highwire.org:guest:privilege] => Array ( [runtime-id] => urn:ac.highwire.org:guest:privilege [type] => privilege-set [privilege-set] => GUEST ) ) [credentials] => Array ( [method] => guest ) ) ) 1nareshArray ( [urn:ac.highwire.org:guest:identity] => Array ( [runtime-id] => urn:ac.highwire.org:guest:identity [type] => guest [service-id] => ajnr-ac.highwire.org [access-type] => Controlled [privilege] => Array ( [urn:ac.highwire.org:guest:privilege] => Array ( [runtime-id] => urn:ac.highwire.org:guest:privilege [type] => privilege-set [privilege-set] => GUEST ) ) [credentials] => Array ( [method] => guest ) ) )Table 2:Visibility of tract: MRI and operative findingsa
Tract Visibility LDM (n = 12) CDS (n = 10) P Value Subcutaneous 12 (100%) 10 (100%) – Intrathecalb Entirely visible 10 (83%) 1 (10%) .003 Partially visible 2 (17%) 4 (40%) Poorly visible 0 (0%) 4 (40%)
↵a Data are number of patients, with percentages in parentheses.
↵b Because the tract of 1 patient with CDS was revealed to end in the dura mater at the operation and there was no tract in the intrathecal area, only 9 CDS tracts were assessed with regard to visibility and attachment site in its intrathecal portion.