Literature DB >> 17412542

Evaluation of intervertebral disc herniation and hypermobile intersegmental instability in symptomatic adult patients undergoing recumbent and upright MRI of the cervical or lumbosacral spines.

Antonio Ferreiro Perez1, Millan Garcia Isidro, Elena Ayerbe, Julio Castedo, J R Jinkins.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: The purpose of the study was to determine the difference in findings between recumbent and upright-sitting MRI of the cervical and lumbosacral spine in patients with related sign and symptoms.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 89 patients were studied (lumbosacral spine: 45 patients; cervical: 44 patients). T1-weighted (TR: 350, TE: 20) fast spin echo and T2-weighted (TR: 2500, TE: 160) fast spin echo images were acquired in the sagittal and axial planes in both the recumbent and sitting-neutral positions. The images were acquired on the Upright MRI unit (Fonar Corporation, Melville, NY). Differences were sought between the recumbent and upright-sitting positions at all levels imaged, in both planes.
RESULTS: The total number of cases of pathology was 68, including instances of posterior disc herniation and anterior and posterior spondylolisthesis. Focal posterior disc herniations were noted in 55 patients (cervical: 31, lumbosacral: 24) [62% of patients]. Six of these herniations (cervical: 4, lumbosacral: 2) [11%] were seen only on the upright-sitting study. Focal posterior disc herniations were seen to comparatively enlarge in size in 35 patients on the upright-seated examination (cervical: 21, lumbosacral: 14) [72%], and reduce in size in 9 patients (cervical: 5, lumbosacral: 4) [18%]. Degenerative anterior (n: 11) and posterior (n: 2) spondylolisthesis was seen in 13 patients (cervical: 0, lumbosacral: 13) [15% of patient total]. Anterior spondylolisthesis was only seen on the upright-seated examination in 4 patients (cervical: 0, lumbosacral: 4) [31%]. Anterior spondylolisthesis was comparatively greater in degree on the upright-seated study in 7 patients (cervical: 0, lumbosacral: 7) [54%]. Posterior spondylolisthesis was comparatively greater in degree on the recumbent examination in 2 patients (cervical: 0, lumbosacral: 2) [15%]. The overall combined recumbent miss rate in cases of pathology was 15% (10/68). The overall combined recumbent underestimation rate in cases of pathology was 62% (42/68). The overall combined upright-seated underestimation in cases of pathology was 16% (11/69).
CONCLUSIONS: Overall, upright-seated MRI was found to be superior to recumbent MRI of the spine in 52 patents (recumbent missed pathology [n: 10]+recumbent underestimated pathology [n: 42]=52/89 total patients: 58%) in cases of posterior disc herniation and anterior spondylolisthesis. This seems to validate the importance of weight-bearing imaging in the spine that might be expected to unmask positional enlarging disc herniations and worsening spondylolisthesis. Overall, recumbent MRI was found to be superior to upright-seated MRI in 11 cases (11/89: 12%). The latter finding was possibly due to the fact that upright seated position is actually partial flexion that might be expected to reduce some cases of hypermobile posterior spondylolisthesis.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17412542     DOI: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2006.12.007

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Radiol        ISSN: 0720-048X            Impact factor:   3.528


  16 in total

1.  Clinical feasibility of a magnetic resonance tracking system to guide the position of the scan plane during physiologic joint motion.

Authors:  J Vandevenne; A Pearle; P Lang; K Butts Pauly; G Bergman
Journal:  Radiol Med       Date:  2009-12-28       Impact factor: 3.469

2.  Juxtafacet cysts of the lumbar spine: a positional MRI study.

Authors:  Pascal Niggemann; Johannes Kuchta; Janine Hoeffer; Dieter Grosskurth; Hans-Konrad Beyer; Karl-Stefan Delank
Journal:  Skeletal Radiol       Date:  2011-05-11       Impact factor: 2.199

3.  Comparison between pain at discography and morphological disc changes at axial loaded MRI in patients with low back pain.

Authors:  Hanna Hebelka; Helena Brisby; Tommy Hansson
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2014-06-24       Impact factor: 3.134

4.  Effects of spine loading in a patient with post-decompression lumbar disc herniation: observations using an open weight-bearing MRI.

Authors:  Niladri Kumar Mahato; Daryl Sybert; Tim Law; Brian Clark
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2016-05-09       Impact factor: 3.134

5.  Occult neural foraminal stenosis caused by association between disc degeneration and facet joint osteoarthritis: demonstration with dedicated upright MRI system.

Authors:  Alessandra Splendiani; Fabiana Ferrari; Antonio Barile; Carlo Masciocchi; Massimo Gallucci
Journal:  Radiol Med       Date:  2013-12-12       Impact factor: 3.469

Review 6.  Mechanical and cellular processes driving cervical myelopathy.

Authors:  Roisin T Dolan; Joseph S Butler; John M O'Byrne; Ashley R Poynton
Journal:  World J Orthop       Date:  2016-01-18

7.  Upright magnetic resonance imaging of the lumbar spine: Back pain and radiculopathy.

Authors:  Ha Son Nguyen; Ninh Doan; Saman Shabani; Jamie Baisden; Christopher Wolfla; Glenn Paskoff; Barry Shender; Brian Stemper
Journal:  J Craniovertebr Junction Spine       Date:  2016 Jan-Mar

8.  Imaging modalities for cervical spondylotic stenosis and myelopathy.

Authors:  C Green; J Butler; S Eustace; A Poynton; J M O'Byrne
Journal:  Adv Orthop       Date:  2011-07-20

9.  Lumbar spine MRI in upright position for diagnosing acute and chronic low back pain: statistical analysis of morphological changes.

Authors:  Umberto Tarantino; Ezio Fanucci; Riccardo Iundusi; Monica Celi; Simone Altobelli; Elena Gasbarra; Giovanni Simonetti; Guglielmo Manenti
Journal:  J Orthop Traumatol       Date:  2012-09-16

10.  The Lumbar Spine as a Dynamic Structure Depicted in Upright MRI.

Authors:  David Kubosch; Marco Vicari; Alexander Siller; Peter C Strohm; Eva J Kubosch; Stefan Knöller; Jürgen Hennig; Norbert P Südkamp; Kaywan Izadpanah
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2015-08       Impact factor: 1.817

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.