Literature DB >> 25034083

Clinical usefulness of electrodiagnostic study to predict surgical outcomes in lumbosacral disc herniation or spinal stenosis.

Jung Hwan Lee1, Sang-Ho Lee2.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Although surgeries have been performed for the treatment of lumbar disc herniation (LDH) or lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS), not all patients who undergo surgery are satisfied with the outcome. Electrodiagnostic study (EDX) can assess the physiological functions of nerve roots with higher specificity and relate better with clinical manifestations. The purpose of this study was to examine how EDX can predict surgical outcomes in patients with LDH and LSS and to compare the predicted values of EDX with other clinical factors and MRI findings.
METHODS: Patients diagnosed with LDH or LSS without neurological deficits, who underwent EDX before lumbar surgery, were selected and analyzed. Patients were divided into groups of successful and unsuccessful surgical outcomes according to a modified MacNab classification. We obtained pre-operative clinical data, radiological results, and EDX results.
RESULTS: Using EDX, radiculopathy was found in 236 patients (52.7%) in the study population. Radiculopathy on EDX was significantly related only to unsuccessful surgical outcomes. The association of spondylolisthesis showed the trends towards unsuccessful surgical outcome, despite statistical insignificance.
CONCLUSIONS: EDX detected functional abnormalities of nerve roots that did not show clinical manifestation and did not appear compressed on MRI. These abnormalities are important predictive factors for surgical outcomes in patients with LDH or LSS. Therefore, pre-operative EDX is a clinically useful method to predict surgical prognosis.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Disc herniation; Eletrodiagnostic study; Prognosis; Radiculopathy; Spinal stenosis; Surgery

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25034083     DOI: 10.1007/s00586-014-3475-8

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


  26 in total

1.  Lumbar spinal stenosis: conservative or surgical management?: A prospective 10-year study.

Authors:  T Amundsen; H Weber; H J Nordal; B Magnaes; M Abdelnoor; F Lilleâs
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2000-06-01       Impact factor: 3.468

2.  Electrophysiologic evaluation of lumbosacral radiculopathies: electromyography, late responses, and somatosensory evoked potentials.

Authors:  M J Aminoff; D S Goodin; G J Parry; N M Barbaro; P R Weinstein; M L Rosenblum
Journal:  Neurology       Date:  1985-10       Impact factor: 9.910

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.  Magnetic resonance imaging of the lumbar spine in asymptomatic adults. Cooperative study--American Society of Neuroimaging.

Authors:  J O Greenberg; R G Schnell
Journal:  J Neuroimaging       Date:  1991-02       Impact factor: 2.486

5.  Physical examination, magnetic resonance image, and electrodiagnostic study in patients with lumbosacral disc herniation or spinal stenosis.

Authors:  Jung Hwan Lee; Sang-Ho Lee
Journal:  J Rehabil Med       Date:  2012-10       Impact factor: 2.912

6.  Needle EMG has a lower false positive rate than MRI in asymptomatic older adults being evaluated for lumbar spinal stenosis.

Authors:  Anthony Chiodo; Andrew J Haig; Karen S J Yamakawa; Douglas Quint; Henry Tong; Vaishali R Choksi
Journal:  Clin Neurophysiol       Date:  2007-02-16       Impact factor: 3.708

7.  Predictors of residual symptoms in lower extremities after decompression surgery on lumbar spinal stenosis.

Authors:  Nobuhiro Hara; Hiroyuki Oka; Takashi Yamazaki; Katsushi Takeshita; Motoaki Murakami; Kazuto Hoshi; Sei Terayama; Atsushi Seichi; Kozo Nakamura; Hiroshi Kawaguchi; Ko Matsudaira
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2010-03-23       Impact factor: 3.134

8.  The use of electromyography to predict functional outcome following transforaminal epidural spinal injections for lumbar radiculopathy.

Authors:  David E Fish; Eli P Shirazi; Quynh Pham
Journal:  J Pain       Date:  2007-11-05       Impact factor: 5.820

9.  Health-related quality of life (EQ-5D) before and one year after surgery for lumbar spinal stenosis.

Authors:  K-A Jansson; G Németh; F Granath; B Jönsson; P Blomqvist
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Br       Date:  2009-02

10.  Prognostic factors in lumbar spinal stenosis surgery.

Authors:  Freyr G Sigmundsson; Xiao P Kang; Bo Jönsson; Björn Strömqvist
Journal:  Acta Orthop       Date:  2012-10       Impact factor: 3.717

View more
  3 in total

1.  Physical Predictors of Favorable Postoperative Outcomes in Patients Undergoing Laminectomy or Laminotomy for Central Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Controlled Trial.

Authors:  Andrée-Anne Marchand; Mariève Houle; Julie O'Shaughnessy; Claude-Édouard Châtillon; Martin Descarreaux
Journal:  Front Neurol       Date:  2022-04-15       Impact factor: 4.003

2.  Minimally invasive versus open transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion for single segmental lumbar disc herniation: A meta-analysis.

Authors:  Jing Xue; Yueming Song; Hao Liu; Limin Liu; Tao Li; Quan Gong
Journal:  J Back Musculoskelet Rehabil       Date:  2022       Impact factor: 1.456

3.  Electromyography activities in patients with lower lumbar disc herniation.

Authors:  Shuyan Qie; Wei Li; Xiangrong Li; Xuemei Chen; Weijun Gong; Jianing Xi; Fenglong Sun; Shouwei Yue
Journal:  J Back Musculoskelet Rehabil       Date:  2020       Impact factor: 1.398

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.