PURPOSE: To define radiological criteria and parameters as a minimum standard in a structured radiological report for patients with lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) and to identify criteria and parameters for research purposes. MATERIAL AND METHODS: All available radiological criteria and parameters for LSS were identified using systematic literature reviews and a Delphi survey. We invited to the consensus meeting, and provided data, to 15 internationally renowned experts from different countries. During the meeting, these experts reached consensus in a structured and systematic discussion about a core list of radiological criteria and parameters for standard reporting. RESULTS: We identified a total of 27 radiological criteria and parameters for LSS. During the meeting, the experts identified five of these as core items for a structured report. For central stenosis, these were "compromise of the central zone" and "relation between fluid and cauda equina". For lateral stenosis, the group agreed that "nerve root compression in the lateral recess" was a core item. For foraminal stenosis, we included "nerve root impingement" and "compromise of the foraminal zone". CONCLUSION: As a minimum standard, five radiological criteria should be used in a structured radiological report in LSS. Other parameters are well suited for research. KEY POINTS: The five most important radiological criteria for standard clinical reporting were selected. The five most important quantitative radiological parameters for research purposes were selected. These core criteria could help standardize the communication between health care providers.
PURPOSE: To define radiological criteria and parameters as a minimum standard in a structured radiological report for patients with lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) and to identify criteria and parameters for research purposes. MATERIAL AND METHODS: All available radiological criteria and parameters for LSS were identified using systematic literature reviews and a Delphi survey. We invited to the consensus meeting, and provided data, to 15 internationally renowned experts from different countries. During the meeting, these experts reached consensus in a structured and systematic discussion about a core list of radiological criteria and parameters for standard reporting. RESULTS: We identified a total of 27 radiological criteria and parameters for LSS. During the meeting, the experts identified five of these as core items for a structured report. For central stenosis, these were "compromise of the central zone" and "relation between fluid and cauda equina". For lateral stenosis, the group agreed that "nerve root compression in the lateral recess" was a core item. For foraminal stenosis, we included "nerve root impingement" and "compromise of the foraminal zone". CONCLUSION: As a minimum standard, five radiological criteria should be used in a structured radiological report in LSS. Other parameters are well suited for research. KEY POINTS: The five most important radiological criteria for standard clinical reporting were selected. The five most important quantitative radiological parameters for research purposes were selected. These core criteria could help standardize the communication between health care providers.
Authors: Mary C Frates; Carol B Benson; J William Charboneau; Edmund S Cibas; Orlo H Clark; Beverly G Coleman; John J Cronan; Peter M Doubilet; Douglas B Evans; John R Goellner; Ian D Hay; Barbara S Hertzberg; Charles M Intenzo; R Brooke Jeffrey; Jill E Langer; P Reed Larsen; Susan J Mandel; William D Middleton; Carl C Reading; Steven I Sherman; Franklin N Tessler Journal: Radiology Date: 2005-12 Impact factor: 11.105
Authors: Jeroen C van Rijn; Nina Klemetsö; Johannes B Reitsma; Charles B L M Majoie; Frans J Hulsmans; Wilco C Peul; Jan Stam; Patrick M Bossuyt; Gerard J den Heeten Journal: AJR Am J Roentgenol Date: 2005-01 Impact factor: 3.959
Authors: Constantin Schizas; Nicolas Theumann; Alexandre Burn; Rosamond Tansey; Douglas Wardlaw; Francis W Smith; Gerit Kulik Journal: Spine (Phila Pa 1976) Date: 2010-10-01 Impact factor: 3.468
Authors: Christian Barz; Markus Melloh; Lukas P Staub; Sarah J Lord; Harry R Merk; Thomas Barz Journal: Eur Spine J Date: 2017-02-04 Impact factor: 3.134
Authors: Sebastian Winklhofer; Ulrike Held; Jakob M Burgstaller; Tim Finkenstaedt; Nicolae Bolog; Nils Ulrich; Johann Steurer; Gustav Andreisek; Filippo Del Grande Journal: Eur Spine J Date: 2016-06-22 Impact factor: 3.134
Authors: F A Perez; S Quinet; J G Jarvik; Q T Nguyen; E Aghayev; D Jitjai; W D Hwang; E R Jarvik; S S Nedeljkovic; A L Avins; J M Schwalb; F E Diehn; C J Standaert; D R Nerenz; T Annaswamy; Z Bauer; D Haynor; P J Heagerty; J L Friedly Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2019-05-02 Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: Michael Travis Caton; Walter F Wiggins; Stuart R Pomerantz; Katherine P Andriole Journal: Neuroradiology Date: 2021-02-16 Impact factor: 2.804
Authors: Nils H Ulrich; Jakob M Burgstaller; Florian Brunner; François Porchet; Mazda Farshad; Giuseppe Pichierri; Johann Steurer; Ulrike Held Journal: BMC Musculoskelet Disord Date: 2016-04-18 Impact factor: 2.362