Literature DB >> 18955509

Lumbar spine: reliability of MR imaging findings.

John A Carrino1, Jon D Lurie, Anna N A Tosteson, Tor D Tosteson, Eugene J Carragee, Jay Kaiser, Margaret R Grove, Emily Blood, Loretta H Pearson, James N Weinstein, Richard Herzog.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To characterize the inter- and intraobserver variability of qualitative, non-disk contour degenerative findings of the lumbar spine at magnetic resonance (MR) imaging.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: The case accrual method used to perform this institutional review board-approved, HIPAA-compliant retrospective study was the random selection of 111 interpretable MR examination cases of subjects from the Spine Patient Outcomes Research Trial. The subjects were aged 18-87 years (mean, 53 years +/- 16 [standard deviation]). Four independent readers rated the cases according to defined criteria. A subsample of 40 MR examination cases was selected for reevaluation at least 1 month later. The following findings were assessed: spondylolisthesis, disk degeneration, marrow endplate abnormality (Modic changes), posterior anular hyperintense zone (HIZ), and facet arthropathy. Inter- and intraobserver agreement in rating the data was summarized by using weighted kappa statistics.
RESULTS: Interobserver agreement was good (kappa = 0.66) in rating disk degeneration and moderate in rating spondylolisthesis (kappa = 0.55), Modic changes (kappa = 0.59), facet arthropathy (kappa = 0.54), and posterior HIZ (kappa = 0.44). Interobserver agreement in rating the extent of Modic changes was moderate: kappa Values were 0.43 for determining superior anteroposterior extent, 0.47 for determining superior craniocaudal extent, 0.57 for determining inferior anteroposterior extent, and 0.48 for determining inferior craniocaudal extent. Intraobserver agreement was good in rating spondylolisthesis (kappa = 0.66), disk degeneration (kappa = 0.74), Modic changes (kappa = 0.64), facet arthropathy (kappa = 0.69), and posterior HIZ (kappa = 0.67). Intraobserver agreement in rating the extent of Modic changes was moderate, with kappa values of 0.54 for superior anteroposterior, 0.60 for inferior anteroposterior, 0.50 for superior craniocaudal, and 0.60 for inferior craniocaudal extent determinations.
CONCLUSION: The interpretation of general lumbar spine MR characteristics has sufficient reliability to warrant the further evaluation of these features as potential prognostic indicators. (c) RSNA, 2008.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18955509      PMCID: PMC2657480          DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2493071999

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Radiology        ISSN: 0033-8419            Impact factor:   11.105


  24 in total

1.  Expert system-controlled image display.

Authors:  H A Swett; P R Fisher; A I Cohn; P L Miller; P G Mutalik
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1989-08       Impact factor: 11.105

2.  Interobserver reliability of detecting lumbar intervertebral disc high-intensity zone on magnetic resonance imaging and association of high-intensity zone with pain and anular disruption.

Authors:  B M Smith; E L Hurwitz; D Solsberg; D Rubinstein; D S Corenman; A P Dwyer; J Kleiner
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1998-10-01       Impact factor: 3.468

3.  Abnormal magnetic-resonance scans of the lumbar spine in asymptomatic subjects. A prospective investigation.

Authors:  S D Boden; D O Davis; T S Dina; N J Patronas; S W Wiesel
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  1990-03       Impact factor: 5.284

4.  Painful Lumbar Disk Derangement: Relevance of Endplate Abnormalities at MR Imaging.

Authors:  D Weishaupt; M Zanetti; J Hodler; K Min; B Fuchs; C W Pfirrmann; N Boos
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  2001-02       Impact factor: 11.105

5.  2000 Volvo Award winner in clinical studies: Lumbar high-intensity zone and discography in subjects without low back problems.

Authors:  E J Carragee; S J Paragioudakis; S Khurana
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2000-12-01       Impact factor: 3.468

6.  Lumbar disc high-intensity zone. Correlation of magnetic resonance imaging and discography.

Authors:  K P Schellhas; S R Pollei; C R Gundry; K B Heithoff
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1996-01-01       Impact factor: 3.468

7.  Annular tears and disk herniation: prevalence and contrast enhancement on MR images in the absence of low back pain or sciatica.

Authors:  T W Stadnik; R R Lee; H L Coen; E C Neirynck; T S Buisseret; M J Osteaux
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1998-01       Impact factor: 11.105

8.  Magnetic resonance imaging of the lumbar spine in people without back pain.

Authors:  M C Jensen; M N Brant-Zawadzki; N Obuchowski; M T Modic; D Malkasian; J S Ross
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  1994-07-14       Impact factor: 91.245

9.  MR imaging of the lumbar spine: prevalence of intervertebral disk extrusion and sequestration, nerve root compression, end plate abnormalities, and osteoarthritis of the facet joints in asymptomatic volunteers.

Authors:  D Weishaupt; M Zanetti; J Hodler; N Boos
Journal:  Radiology       Date:  1998-12       Impact factor: 11.105

10.  High-intensity zone: a diagnostic sign of painful lumbar disc on magnetic resonance imaging.

Authors:  C Aprill; N Bogduk
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  1992-05       Impact factor: 3.039

View more
  58 in total

1.  Prospective Comparison of Changes in Lumbar Spine MRI Findings over Time between Individuals with Acute Low Back Pain and Controls: An Exploratory Study.

Authors:  J Panagopoulos; J S Magnussen; J Hush; C G Maher; M Crites-Battie; J G Jarvik; T S Jensen; M J Hancock
Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol       Date:  2017-08-03       Impact factor: 3.825

2.  Consensus versus disagreement in imaging research: a case study using the LIDC database.

Authors:  Dmitriy Zinovev; Yujie Duo; Daniela S Raicu; Jacob Furst; Samuel G Armato
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2012-06       Impact factor: 4.056

3.  Reliability of change in lumbar MRI findings over time in patients with and without disc prosthesis--comparing two different image evaluation methods.

Authors:  Linda Berg; Oivind Gjertsen; Christian Hellum; Gesche Neckelmann; Lars G Johnsen; Geir E Eide; Ansgar Espeland
Journal:  Skeletal Radiol       Date:  2012-03-20       Impact factor: 2.199

4.  Are Modic changes prognostic for recovery in a cohort of patients with non-specific low back pain?

Authors:  Anne Keller; Eleanor Boyle; Thomas A Skog; J David Cassidy; Erik Bautz-Holter
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2011-08-12       Impact factor: 3.134

5.  Influence of nomenclature in the interpretation of lumbar disk contour on MR imaging: a comparison of the agreement using the combined task force and the nordic nomenclatures.

Authors:  E Arana; F M Kovacs; A Royuela; A Estremera; H Sarasíbar; G Amengual; I Galarraga; C Martínez; A Muriel; V Abraira; J Zamora; C Campillo
Journal:  AJNR Am J Neuroradiol       Date:  2011-04-14       Impact factor: 3.825

6.  Long-term results of surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis: a randomised controlled trial.

Authors:  Pär Slätis; Antti Malmivaara; Markku Heliövaara; Päivi Sainio; Arto Herno; Jyrki Kankare; Seppo Seitsalo; Kaj Tallroth; Veli Turunen; Paul Knekt; Heikki Hurri
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2011-01-15       Impact factor: 3.134

Review 7.  Challenges and opportunities for imaging journals: emerging from the shadows.

Authors:  Herbert Y Kressel
Journal:  Skeletal Radiol       Date:  2011-08-17       Impact factor: 2.199

Review 8.  Imaging of lumbar degenerative disk disease: history and current state.

Authors:  Todd M Emch; Michael T Modic
Journal:  Skeletal Radiol       Date:  2011-08-17       Impact factor: 2.199

9.  A statistical model for intervertebral disc degeneration: determination of the optimal T2 cut-off values.

Authors:  S A Nagy; I Juhasz; H Komaromy; K Pozsar; I Zsigmond; G Perlaki; G Orsi; A Schwarcz; N Walter; T Doczi; P Bogner
Journal:  Clin Neuroradiol       Date:  2013-11-12       Impact factor: 3.649

10.  Magnetic resonance imaging predictors of surgical outcome in patients with lumbar intervertebral disc herniation.

Authors:  Jon D Lurie; Rachel A Moses; Anna N A Tosteson; Tor D Tosteson; Eugene J Carragee; John A Carrino; Jay A Kaiser; Richard J Herzog
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2013-06-15       Impact factor: 3.468

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.