Literature DB >> 19005690

Qualitative and quantitative assessment of degeneration of cervical intervertebral discs and facet joints.

Joris Walraevens1, Baoge Liu, Joke Meersschaert, Philippe Demaerel, Hans Delye, Bart Depreitere, Jos Vander Sloten, Jan Goffin.   

Abstract

Degeneration of intervertebral discs and facet joints is one of the most frequently encountered spinal disorders. In order to describe and quantify degeneration and evaluate a possible relationship between degeneration and biomechanical parameters, e.g., the intervertebral range of motion and intradiscal pressure, a scoring system for degeneration is mandatory. However, few scoring systems for the assessment of degeneration of the cervical spine exist. Therefore, two separate objective scoring systems to qualitatively and quantitatively assess the degree of cervical intervertebral disc and facet joint degeneration were developed and validated. The scoring system for cervical disc degeneration consists of three variables which are individually scored on neutral lateral radiographs: "height loss" (0-4 points), "anterior osteophytes" (0-3 points) and "endplate sclerosis" (0-2 points). The scoring system for facet joint degeneration consists of four variables which are individually scored on neutral computed tomography scans: "hypertrophy" (0-2 points), "osteophytes" (0-1 point), "irregularity" on the articular surface (0-1 point) and "joint space narrowing" (0-1 point). Each variable contributes with varying importance to the overall degeneration score (max 9 points for the scoring system of cervical disc degeneration and max 5 points for facet joint degeneration). Degeneration of 20 discs and facet joints of 20 patients was blindly assessed by four raters: two neurosurgeons (one senior and one junior) and two radiologists (one senior and one junior), firstly based on first subjective impression and secondly using the scoring systems. Measurement errors and inter- and intra-rater agreement were determined. The measurement error of the scoring system for cervical disc degeneration was 11.1 versus 17.9% of the subjective impression results. This scoring system showed excellent intra-rater agreement (ICC = 0.86, 0.75-0.93) and excellent inter-rater agreement (ICC = 0.78, 0.64-0.88). Surgeons as well as radiologists and seniors as well as juniors obtained excellent inter- and intra-rater agreement. The measurement error of the scoring system for cervical facet joint degeneration was 20.1 versus 24.2% of the subjective impression results. This scoring system showed good intra-rater agreement (ICC = 0.71, 0.42-0.89) and fair inter-rater agreement (ICC = 0.49, 0.26-0.74). Both scoring systems fulfilled the criteria for recommendation proposed by Kettler and Wilke. Our scoring systems can be reliable and objective tools for assessing cervical disc and facet joint degeneration. Moreover, the scoring system of cervical disc degeneration was shown to be experience- and discipline-independent.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 19005690      PMCID: PMC2899425          DOI: 10.1007/s00586-008-0820-9

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Spine J        ISSN: 0940-6719            Impact factor:   3.134


  21 in total

1.  Contribution of disc degeneration to osteophyte formation in the cervical spine: a biomechanical investigation.

Authors:  S Kumaresan; N Yoganandan; F A Pintar; D J Maiman; V K Goel
Journal:  J Orthop Res       Date:  2001-09       Impact factor: 3.494

2.  Spine arthroplasty: a historical review.

Authors:  Marek Szpalski; Robert Gunzburg; Michael Mayer
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2002-08-13       Impact factor: 3.134

3.  Measurement error and correlation coefficients.

Authors:  J M Bland; D G Altman
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1996-07-06

4.  Degenerative changes in the intervertebral discs of the lumbar spine and their sequelae.

Authors:  B Vernon-Roberts; C J Pirie
Journal:  Rheumatol Rehabil       Date:  1977-02

5.  Adjacent disc degeneration in patients with prior spinal fusion procedures.

Authors:  T C Derian
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1994-10-01       Impact factor: 3.468

6.  The effect of disc degeneration and facet joint osteoarthritis on the segmental flexibility of the lumbar spine.

Authors:  A Fujiwara; T H Lim; H S An; N Tanaka; C H Jeon; G B Andersson; V M Haughton
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2000-12-01       Impact factor: 3.468

7.  Early histologic changes in lower lumbar discs and facet joints and their correlation.

Authors:  N C Gries; U Berlemann; R J Moore; B Vernon-Roberts
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2000-02       Impact factor: 3.134

8.  Disc degeneration in magnetic resonance imaging. A comparative biochemical, histologic, and radiologic study in cadaver spines.

Authors:  M Tertti; H Paajanen; M Laato; H Aho; M Komu; M Kormano
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1991-06       Impact factor: 3.468

9.  Discs degenerate before facets.

Authors:  D Butler; J H Trafimow; G B Andersson; T W McNeill; M S Huckman
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1990-02       Impact factor: 3.468

10.  Human lumbar apophyseal joint damage and intervertebral disc degeneration.

Authors:  M W Swanepoel; L M Adams; J E Smeathers
Journal:  Ann Rheum Dis       Date:  1995-03       Impact factor: 19.103

View more
  23 in total

1.  Age-related changes in human cervical, thoracal and lumbar intervertebral disc exhibit a strong intra-individual correlation.

Authors:  C Weiler; M Schietzsch; T Kirchner; A G Nerlich; N Boos; K Wuertz
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2011-08-12       Impact factor: 3.134

Review 2.  Factors that may affect outcome in cervical artificial disc replacement: a systematic review.

Authors:  Jian Kang; Changgui Shi; Yifei Gu; Chengwei Yang; Rui Gao
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2015-07-09       Impact factor: 3.134

Review 3.  Systematic review of radiological cervical foraminal grading systems.

Authors:  James Meacock; Moritz Schramm; Senthil Selvanathan; Stuart Currie; Deborah Stocken; David Jayne; Simon Thomson
Journal:  Neuroradiology       Date:  2021-01-04       Impact factor: 2.804

4.  Unintended fusion in cervical artificial disk replacement: a prospective study on heterotopic ossification, progression, and clinical outcome, with 5-year follow-up.

Authors:  Catarina Marques; Anna MacDowall; Martin Skeppholm; Nuno Canto Moreira; Claes Olerud
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2021-01-20       Impact factor: 3.134

5.  Laterality of cervical disc herniation.

Authors:  Yuichi Takahashi; Takao Yasuhara; Shinji Kumamoto; Kotaro Yoneda; Takashi Tanoue; Masayuki Nakahara; Takafumi Inoue; Yasukazu Hijikata; Tejin Lee; Cesario V Borlongan; Koichi Ogawa; Kenki Nishida
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2012-11-13       Impact factor: 3.134

6.  Cervical spine injuries and flexibilities following axial impact with lateral eccentricity.

Authors:  C Van Toen; J Street; T R Oxland; Peter A Cripton
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2014-10-25       Impact factor: 3.134

7.  Radiographic cervical spine degenerative findings: a study on a large population from age 18 to 97 years.

Authors:  Youping Tao; Fabio Galbusera; Frank Niemeyer; Dino Samartzis; Daniel Vogele; Hans-Joachim Wilke
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2020-10-06       Impact factor: 3.134

8.  Clinical and radiological outcomes of cervical disc arthroplasty: ten year follow-up study.

Authors:  Qingpeng Song; Da He; Xiao Han; Ning Zhang; Jinchao Wang; Wei Tian
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2018-04-21       Impact factor: 3.075

9.  Inter-rater reliability between musculoskeletal radiologists and orthopedic surgeons on computed tomography imaging features of spinal metastases.

Authors:  L Khan; G Mitera; L Probyn; M Ford; M Christakis; J Finkelstein; A Donovan; L Zhang; L Zeng; J Rubenstein; A Yee; L Holden; E Chow
Journal:  Curr Oncol       Date:  2011-12       Impact factor: 3.677

10.  Comparison of noncontrast computed tomography and high-field magnetic resonance imaging in the evaluation of Great Danes with cervical spondylomyelopathy.

Authors:  Paula Martin-Vaquero; Ronaldo C da Costa; Wm Tod Drost
Journal:  Vet Radiol Ultrasound       Date:  2014-02-18       Impact factor: 1.363

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.