Kompalli Jwala Satya Siva Raghu Teja1, S Haleem2, R Rajakulasingam3, J Jalli4, Bhamidipaty Kanaka Durgaprasad1, R Botchu5. 1. Department of Radiology, GIMSR, Vizag, India. 2. Department of Spinal Surgery, Royal Orthopaedic Hospital, Birmingham, UK. 3. Department of Musculoskeletal Imaging, Royal National Orthopaedic Hospital, Stanmore, UK. 4. Department of Radiology, Healthpoint, Dubai, United Arab Emirates. 5. Department of Musculoskeletal Imaging, Royal Orthopaedic Hospital, Birmingham, UK.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: T2 inversion sequence is used in routine radiology practice mainly to heighten contrast resolution within the region to be studied but no evidence exists in current literature to assess it's true efficacy for lumbar disc degeneration. The objective of this study was to analyse T2 inversion and evaluate it's efficacy in assessment of lumbar disc pathology,. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective single-centre study included 50 randomly selected patients presenting with back pain and radiculopathy. T2 inversion sequence was obtained in both axial and sagittal planes in addition to routine sequences. All the Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) procedures were performed on 3T. One senior Musculoskeletal (MSK) radiologist, 2 general radiologists and a spinal surgeon blinded to final results reviewed images for the various disc pathologies individually analysing conventional and T2 inversion images. Data was analysed using Fischer's test and Chi2 test with a p value of <0.05 considered as significant. RESULTS: Fifty randomly selected patients (mean age was 47.3 years(range 35-55 years) with back pain and radicular symptoms were included. The spectrum of disc pathologies included protrusions, annular fissures, discal cysts and calcified discs. Based on the above findings, T2 inversion sequence is not proved to be an alternative imaging sequence to routine MR imaging sequences for the depiction of various disc pathologies. CONCLUSION: T2 inversion sequence does not increase the depiction of various lumbar disc pathologies in comparison with conventional sequences when used by experienced MSK radiologists. It may highlight abnormalities better for relatively inexperienced readers such as general radiologists and spinal surgeons.
OBJECTIVE: T2 inversion sequence is used in routine radiology practice mainly to heighten contrast resolution within the region to be studied but no evidence exists in current literature to assess it's true efficacy for lumbar disc degeneration. The objective of this study was to analyse T2 inversion and evaluate it's efficacy in assessment of lumbar disc pathology,. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective single-centre study included 50 randomly selected patients presenting with back pain and radiculopathy. T2 inversion sequence was obtained in both axial and sagittal planes in addition to routine sequences. All the Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) procedures were performed on 3T. One senior Musculoskeletal (MSK) radiologist, 2 general radiologists and a spinal surgeon blinded to final results reviewed images for the various disc pathologies individually analysing conventional and T2 inversion images. Data was analysed using Fischer's test and Chi2 test with a p value of <0.05 considered as significant. RESULTS: Fifty randomly selected patients (mean age was 47.3 years(range 35-55 years) with back pain and radicular symptoms were included. The spectrum of disc pathologies included protrusions, annular fissures, discal cysts and calcified discs. Based on the above findings, T2 inversion sequence is not proved to be an alternative imaging sequence to routine MR imaging sequences for the depiction of various disc pathologies. CONCLUSION: T2 inversion sequence does not increase the depiction of various lumbar disc pathologies in comparison with conventional sequences when used by experienced MSK radiologists. It may highlight abnormalities better for relatively inexperienced readers such as general radiologists and spinal surgeons.
Authors: Ping Hou; Khader M Hasan; Clark W Sitton; Jerry S Wolinsky; Ponnada A Narayana Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2005 Jun-Jul Impact factor: 3.825
Authors: I Riederer; D C Karampinos; M Settles; C Preibisch; J S Bauer; J F Kleine; M Mühlau; C Zimmer Journal: AJNR Am J Neuroradiol Date: 2014-08-28 Impact factor: 3.825