Copyright
©The Author(s) 2024.
World J Gastrointest Oncol. Mar 15, 2024; 16(3): 773-786
Published online Mar 15, 2024. doi: 10.4251/wjgo.v16.i3.773
Published online Mar 15, 2024. doi: 10.4251/wjgo.v16.i3.773
Figure 2 Illustration of three-dimensional pelvic reconstruction in a male patient.
A: Mid-sagittal lateral view: (AB) anterior-posterior diameter of pelvic inlet, (CD) anterior-posterior diameter of mid-pelvis, (CE) anterior-posterior diameter of pelvic outlet, (AC) superior-inferior diameter of the pubic symphysis, (BE) sacrococcygeal distance, (BD) superior-inferior diameter of sacrum, (AE) superior pubococcygeal diameter, (FG) anterior-posterior sacropubic distance, (FI) sacrococcygeal curvature height, (FH) sacral curvature height, (α) sacrococcygeal angle, (β) sacropubic angle; B: Anteroposterior view: (PQ) transverse diameter of pelvic inlet and (LM) interischial spine diameter; C: Posteroanterior view: (LM) interischial spine diameter and (NO) interischial tuberosity diameter.
- Citation: Zhou XC, Ke FY, Dhamija G, Chen H, Wang Q. Study on sex differences and potential clinical value of three-dimensional computerized tomography pelvimetry in rectal cancer patients. World J Gastrointest Oncol 2024; 16(3): 773-786
- URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/1948-5204/full/v16/i3/773.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.4251/wjgo.v16.i3.773