Literature DB >> 28702785

Changes in dural sac caliber with standing MRI improve correlation with symptoms of lumbar spinal stenosis.

Yvonne Yan On Lau1,2, Ryan Ka Lok Lee3, James Francis Griffith3, Carol Lai Yee Chan4, Sheung Wai Law4, Kin On Kwok4.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Weight bearing does alter the dimension of lumbar spinal canal, but no study has analyzed its clinical correlation. This study aims to evaluate whether the changes in dural sac cross-sectional area (DSCA) and sagittal anteroposterior (AP) diameter on standing magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) correlate better with clinical symptoms of lumbar spinal stenosis.
METHODS: Seventy consecutive patients with neurogenic claudication were prospectively recruited to undergo a 0.25-T MRI examination performed in supine and standing positions. Clinical symptoms including the walking distance, Visual Analogue Score of leg pain, Chinese Oswestry Disability Index, and short form-12 were assessed. DSCA and sagittal AP diameter at the most constricted spinal level on supine and standing positions were measured and correlated with each clinical symptom by Pearson correlation coefficients (r).
RESULTS: DSCA and AP diameter on standing MRI and their % changes from supine to standing showed significant (r = 0.55, 0.53, -0.44, -0.43; p < 0.001) and better correlations than those on supine MRI (r = 0.39, 0.42; p < 0.001) with walking distance. Significant correlations were also found between dural sac calibers on standing MRI and leg pain scores (r = -0.20, r = -0.25; p < 0.05). Patients walking ≤500 m had a significantly smaller DSCA, narrower AP diameter and greater % change in dural sac calibers (p < 0.01) than those walking >500 m. A >30% reduction of DSCA and AP diameter was observed in patients with worse claudication distance (p < 0.05).
CONCLUSION: DSCA and sagittal AP diameter on standing MRI correlate significantly and better than findings on supine MRI with claudication symptoms. Standing MRI demonstrates dynamic changes of dural sac and provides an additional value to supine MRI in correlating clinical symptoms of lumbar spinal stenosis.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Functional magnetic resonance imaging; Intermittent claudication; Spinal stenosis; Standing position; Weight bearing

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28702785     DOI: 10.1007/s00586-017-5211-7

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


  42 in total

Review 1.  The Oswestry Disability Index.

Authors:  J C Fairbank; P B Pynsent
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2000-11-15       Impact factor: 3.468

2.  The narrowing of the lumbar spinal canal during loaded MRI: the effects of the disc and ligamentum flavum.

Authors:  Tommy Hansson; Nobuyuki Suzuki; Hanna Hebelka; Arne Gaulitz
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2009-03-11       Impact factor: 3.134

3.  Lumbar stenosis rates in symptomatic patients using weight-bearing and recumbent magnetic resonance imaging.

Authors:  John W Gilbert; J Chad Martin; Greg R Wheeler; Benjamin B Storey; Gregory E Mick; Gay B Richardson; Stephanie L Herder; Kwadwo Gyarteng-Dakwa
Journal:  J Manipulative Physiol Ther       Date:  2011-09-09       Impact factor: 1.437

4.  Clinical symptoms of lumbar spinal stenosis associated with morphological parameters on magnetic resonance images.

Authors:  Young Uk Kim; Yu-Gyeong Kong; Jonghyuk Lee; Yuseon Cheong; Se hun Kim; Hyun Kyu Kim; Jun Young Park; Jeong Hun Suh
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2015-08-21       Impact factor: 3.134

5.  Changes in the lumbar spine of athletes from supine to the true-standing position in magnetic resonance imaging.

Authors:  Frieder Mauch; Christian Jung; Jochen Huth; Gerhard Bauer
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2010-04-20       Impact factor: 3.468

6.  Does multilevel lumbar stenosis lead to poorer outcomes?: a subanalysis of the Spine Patient Outcomes Research Trial (SPORT) lumbar stenosis study.

Authors:  Daniel K Park; Howard S An; Jon D Lurie; Wenyan Zhao; Anna Tosteson; Tor D Tosteson; Harry Herkowitz; Thomas Errico; James N Weinstein
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2010-02-15       Impact factor: 3.468

7.  The Maine Lumbar Spine Study, Part III. 1-year outcomes of surgical and nonsurgical management of lumbar spinal stenosis.

Authors:  S J Atlas; R A Deyo; R B Keller; A M Chapin; D L Patrick; J M Long; D E Singer
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1996-08-01       Impact factor: 3.468

8.  The effect of body position and axial load on spinal canal morphology: an MRI study of central spinal stenosis.

Authors:  Rasmus Madsen; Tue Secher Jensen; Malcolm Pope; Joan Solgaard Sørensen; Tom Bendix
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2008-01-01       Impact factor: 3.468

9.  Reliability and validity of the visual analogue scale for disability in patients with chronic musculoskeletal pain.

Authors:  Anne M Boonstra; Henrica R Schiphorst Preuper; Michiel F Reneman; Jitze B Posthumus; Roy E Stewart
Journal:  Int J Rehabil Res       Date:  2008-06       Impact factor: 1.479

10.  Correlation between disability and MRI findings in lumbar spinal stenosis: a prospective study of 109 patients operated on by decompression.

Authors:  Freyr G Sigmundsson; Xiao P Kang; Bo Jönsson; Björn Strömqvist
Journal:  Acta Orthop       Date:  2011-03-24       Impact factor: 3.717

View more
  6 in total

1.  Dural sac cross-sectional area and morphological grade show significant associations with patient-rated outcome of surgery for lumbar central spinal stenosis.

Authors:  A F Mannion; T F Fekete; D Pacifico; D O'Riordan; S Nauer; M von Büren; C Schizas
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2017-08-30       Impact factor: 3.134

2.  The prevalence of redundant nerve roots in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis is body position dependent: a retrospective observational study with repeated measures design in an upright MRI scanner.

Authors:  Luca Papavero; Stella Ebert; Carlos J Marques
Journal:  Neuroradiology       Date:  2020-04-21       Impact factor: 2.804

3.  Dural sac cross-sectional area is a highly effective parameter for spinal anesthesia in geriatric patients undergoing transurethral resection of the prostate: a prospective, double blinded, randomized study.

Authors:  Wei Bing Wang; Ai Jiao Sun; Hong Ping Yu; Jing Chun Dong; Huang Xu
Journal:  BMC Anesthesiol       Date:  2020-06-03       Impact factor: 2.217

Review 4.  Weight-Bearing Magnetic Resonance Imaging as a Diagnostic Tool That Generates Biomechanical Changes in Spine Anatomy.

Authors:  Brian Fiani; Daniel W Griepp; Jason Lee; Cyrus Davati; Christina M Moawad; Athanasios Kondilis
Journal:  Cureus       Date:  2020-12-14

5.  Clinical Outcomes of "U" Route Transforaminal Percutaneous Endoscopic Lumbar Discectomy in Chronic Pain Patients with Lumbar Spinal Stenosis Combined with Disc Herniation.

Authors:  Binbin Wu; Xinyi Tian; Ce Shi; Chenchen Jiang; Jing Zhang; Gonghao Zhan; Danli Xie
Journal:  Pain Res Manag       Date:  2021-01-19       Impact factor: 3.037

6.  Influence of microsurgical decompression on segmental stability of the lumbar spine - One-year results in a prospective, consecutive case series using upright, kinetic-positional MRI.

Authors:  Dorothea Daentzer; Elina Venjakob; Jessica Schulz; Thorsten Schulze; Michael Schwarze
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2022-08-03       Impact factor: 2.562

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.