Literature DB >> 29116395

Correlations between sedimentation sign, dural sac cross-sectional area, and clinical symptoms of degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis.

Sangbong Ko1.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: In this study, we addressed the correlation between the cross-sectional area (CSA) of the dural sac and the nerve root sedimentation sign (SedSign) and the correlation between the distance of claudication and the CSA of the dural sac or SedSign in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis. We also evaluated the reliability of clinical symptom prediction.
METHODS: We checked claudication distance using a questionnaire, and we gauged low back pain when standing, referred pain, and radiating pain using visual analog scale scores. Three observers measured the CSA of the dural sac and SedSign, and normal nerve root sedimentation was classified as negative (N) and the absence of nerve root sedimentation was positive (P). P was sub-classified as positive with room [P(+); empty space apparent in the dura] or positive without room [P(-); no empty space in the dura]. SedSign reflected ongoing sedimentation inside the spinal canal of the nerve roots. We demonstrated negative sedimentation for the nerve root except for exiting nerve roots that settled into more than half of the dorsal region of the spinal canal and positive sedimentation as compressed nerve roots or as distribution of nerve roots that conglomerated from the ventral to the dorsal part of the equator as nerve roots. We evaluated functional outcomes using the Oswestry Disability Index and Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire. One-way ANOVAs, Chi square tests, and correlation analyses evaluated the correlation CSAs and SedSigns.
RESULTS: The total CSAs for the 716 sites were 98.63 ± 34.38 for N, 76.78 ± 28.78 for P(+), and 55.43 ± 27.77 for P(-), which were all statistically significant (p = 0.01). The correlations between pain and SedSign were not statistically significant (p > 0.05). There was no statistical significance in the correlations between the distance of the claudication and the CSA of the dura sac and the SedSign and between the functional score and the SedSign (both p > 0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: Increasing severity of SedSign indicates progressively smaller dural sac CSA, but there is an inconsistent association with clinical symptoms. Therefore, it is reasonable to suggest that spinal stenosis is severe in patients with severe symptoms.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Cross-sectional area; Lumbar spine; Sedimentation sign; Spinal stenosis

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 29116395     DOI: 10.1007/s00586-017-5374-2

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


  27 in total

1.  The diagnostic value of a treadmill test in predicting lumbar spinal stenosis.

Authors:  Thomas Barz; Markus Melloh; Lukas Staub; Christoph Roeder; Jörn Lange; Franz-Georg Smiszek; Jean-Claude Theis; Harry R Merk
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2008-02-08       Impact factor: 3.134

2.  Long-term clinical and magnetic resonance imaging follow-up assessment of patients with lumbar spinal stenosis after laminectomy.

Authors:  A Herno; K Partanen; T Talaslahti; E Kaukanen; V Turunen; O Suomalainen; O Airaksinen
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  1999-08-01       Impact factor: 3.468

3.  Surgical and nonsurgical management of lumbar spinal stenosis: four-year outcomes from the maine lumbar spine study.

Authors:  S J Atlas; R B Keller; D Robson; R A Deyo; D E Singer
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2000-03-01       Impact factor: 3.468

4.  Clinical validity of the nerve root sedimentation sign in patients with suspected lumbar spinal stenosis.

Authors:  Thomas Barz; Lukas P Staub; Markus Melloh; Gregor Hamann; Sarah J Lord; Mark D Chatfield; Patrick M Bossuyt; Joern Lange; Harry R Merk
Journal:  Spine J       Date:  2013-09-20       Impact factor: 4.166

5.  Long-term outcomes of surgical and nonsurgical management of lumbar spinal stenosis: 8 to 10 year results from the maine lumbar spine study.

Authors:  Steven J Atlas; Robert B Keller; Yen A Wu; Richard A Deyo; Daniel E Singer
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2005-04-15       Impact factor: 3.468

6.  Preliminary results of the use of a two-stage treadmill test as a clinical diagnostic tool in the differential diagnosis of lumbar spinal stenosis.

Authors:  J M Fritz; R E Erhard; A Delitto; W C Welch; P E Nowakowski
Journal:  J Spinal Disord       Date:  1997-10

7.  Nerve root sedimentation sign: evaluation of a new radiological sign in lumbar spinal stenosis.

Authors:  Thomas Barz; Markus Melloh; Lukas P Staub; Sarah J Lord; Jörn Lange; Christoph P Röder; Jean-Claude Theis; Harry R Merk
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2010-04-15       Impact factor: 3.468

8.  Clinical validation study to measure the performance of the Nerve Root Sedimentation Sign for the diagnosis of lumbar spinal stenosis.

Authors:  Lukas P Staub; Thomas Barz; Markus Melloh; Sarah J Lord; Mark Chatfield; Patrick M Bossuyt
Journal:  Contemp Clin Trials       Date:  2011-02-04       Impact factor: 2.226

9.  The sedimentation sign for differential diagnosis of lumbar spinal stenosis.

Authors:  Luciana Gazzi Macedo; Yue Wang; Michele C Battié
Journal:  Spine (Phila Pa 1976)       Date:  2013-05-01       Impact factor: 3.468

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
  7 in total

1.  Analysis of radiological parameters associated with decreased fractional anisotropy values on diffusion tensor imaging in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis.

Authors:  Xiandi Wang; Hongli Wang; Chi Sun; Shuyi Zhou; Tao Meng; Feizhou Lv; Xiaosheng Ma; Xinlei Xia; Jianyuan Jiang
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2018-04-26       Impact factor: 3.134

2.  [Lumbar spinal stenosis].

Authors:  Christof Birkenmaier; Manuel Fuetsch
Journal:  Orthopadie (Heidelb)       Date:  2022-09-09

3.  Nerve root sedimentation sign on MRI: A triage screen for leg dominant symptoms?

Authors:  Zachary Huschi; Laura Neuburger; Syed Uzair Ahmed; Yanzhao Cheng; Daryl R Fourney
Journal:  Eur Spine J       Date:  2021-07-18       Impact factor: 3.134

4.  Superior articular process cross-sectional area is a new sensitive parameter for the diagnosis of lumbar central canal spinal stenosis.

Authors:  Sang Joon An; Jong-Uk Mun; Keum Nae Kang; Young Uk Kim
Journal:  Clin Interv Aging       Date:  2018-09-17       Impact factor: 4.458

5.  Magnitude of Dural Tube Compression Still Does Not Show a Predictive Value for Symptomatic Lumbar Spinal Stenosis for Six-Year Follow-Up: A Longitudinal Observation Study in the Community.

Authors:  Koji Otani; Shin-Ichi Kikuchi; Takuya Nikaido; Shin-Ichi Konno
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2022-06-25       Impact factor: 4.964

6.  Usefulness of preoperative Short Form-36 Mental Component Score as a prognostic factor in patients who underwent decompression surgery for degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis.

Authors:  Sangbong Ko; Wonkee Choi
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2022-09-30       Impact factor: 1.817

7.  [The application of classification of lateral region of lumbar spinal canal for treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis in geriatric patients using full endoscopic transforaminal decompression surgery].

Authors:  Jin Yang; Yu Wang; Qingquan Kong
Journal:  Zhongguo Xiu Fu Chong Jian Wai Ke Za Zhi       Date:  2020-04-15
  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.