Literature DB >> 31157130

Radiologic Evaluation Of Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: The Integration Of Sagittal And Axial Views In Decision Making For Minimally Invasive Surgical Procedures.

Jason Hartman1, Michelle Granville2, Robert E Jacobson2.   

Abstract

Radiologic findings in combination with clinical symptoms are critical in the diagnosis and evaluation of the severity of lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) as well as the need for surgical treatment. Dynamic radiographs, computerized tomography (CT), and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) each provide different but interrelated pieces of information in the patient with lumbar spinal stenosis. Making a treatment decision based only on one of the radiographic studies may negatively affect the treatment outcome. Minimal procedures are predicated on identifying and performing surgery on a limited segment of the lumbar spinal canal affected by the stenosis compared to what occurs during open surgery where the judgment of the spine surgeon often expanded the decompression area based on real-time intra-operative findings correlated with radiologic findings of stenosis. As newer, less invasive procedures are gaining acceptance for surgical treatment of spinal stenosis with symptomatic claudication, radiologic studies become more critical in selecting the correct procedure since there may be no or minimal surgical visual confirmation of the pathology. This article will review how the finding of spinal deformity and motion, canal dimensions, viewed in multiple planes and the presence of facet fluid impact treatment decisions. Differences in these abnormal radiologic findings can affect the selection of surgical procedures ranging from open decompression with pedicle fixation, decompression with interlaminar stabilization, minimally invasive lumbar decompression, and percutaneous interspinous implants providing distraction without decompression. With the development of less invasive procedures, lumbar spinal stenosis is being evaluated and treated not only by spine surgeons but also by interventional pain and neuroradiology physicians that may not be totally familiar with the complexity of the pathology and neuro-radiology of LSS. Each radiologic study provides different information. The goal of this report is to provide a framework for the use of studies such as plain X-rays, dynamic films, MRI, and CT scans as well as the importance of different views, and how to use them in evaluating the abnormal radiologic anatomy seen with LSS and in selecting the most appropriate procedure.

Entities:  

Keywords:  low back pain; lumbar spinal stenosis; neurogenic claudication

Year:  2019        PMID: 31157130      PMCID: PMC6529051          DOI: 10.7759/cureus.4268

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cureus        ISSN: 2168-8184


  6 in total

1.  The Use of Vertiflex® Interspinous Spacer Device in Patients With Lumbar Spinal Stenosis and Concurrent Medical Comorbidities.

Authors:  Jason Hartman; Michelle Granville; Robert E Jacobson
Journal:  Cureus       Date:  2019-08-12

2.  Automated selection of mid-height intervertebral disc slice in traverse lumbar spine MRI using a combination of deep learning feature and machine learning classifier.

Authors:  Friska Natalia; Julio Christian Young; Nunik Afriliana; Hira Meidia; Reyhan Eddy Yunus; Sud Sudirman
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2022-01-13       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 3.  Best Practices for Minimally Invasive Lumbar Spinal Stenosis Treatment 2.0 (MIST): Consensus Guidance from the American Society of Pain and Neuroscience (ASPN).

Authors:  Timothy R Deer; Jay S Grider; Jason E Pope; Tim J Lamer; Sayed E Wahezi; Jonathan M Hagedorn; Steven Falowski; Reda Tolba; Jay M Shah; Natalie Strand; Alex Escobar; Mark Malinowski; Anjum Bux; Navdeep Jassal; Jennifer Hah; Jacqueline Weisbein; Nestor D Tomycz; Jessica Jameson; Erika A Petersen; Dawood Sayed
Journal:  J Pain Res       Date:  2022-05-05       Impact factor: 2.832

4.  Magnetic resonance imaging findings of the lumbar spine, back symptoms and physical function among male adult patients with Scheuermann's disease.

Authors:  Leena Ristolainen; Jyrki A Kettunen; Heidi Danielson; Markku Heliövaara; Dietrich Schlenzka
Journal:  J Orthop       Date:  2020-02-04

5.  Outcome of modified interlaminar decompression: A conservative decompressive surgery for lumbar spine stenosis.

Authors:  Farooq Azam; Seema Sharafat; Zahid Khan; Mumtaz Ali
Journal:  Pak J Med Sci       Date:  2020 May-Jun       Impact factor: 1.088

6.  Automated measurement of anteroposterior diameter and foraminal widths in MRI images for lumbar spinal stenosis diagnosis.

Authors:  Friska Natalia; Hira Meidia; Nunik Afriliana; Julio Christian Young; Reyhan Eddy Yunus; Mohammed Al-Jumaily; Ala Al-Kafri; Sud Sudirman
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2020-11-02       Impact factor: 3.240

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.