Comparative Study of Lumbar Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Myelography in Young Soldiers with Herniated Lumbar Disc

Overview

Journal J Korean Neurosurg Soc

Date 2011 Mar 25

PMID 21430976

Citations 4

Authors

Suk-Hyung Kang

Seung Hong Choi

Nak Jong Seong

Jung Min Ko

Eun-Suk Cho

Kwang Pil Ko

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Objective: This study was undertaken to compare the diagnostic performances of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), MR myelography (MRM) and myelography in young soldiers with a herniated lumbar disc (HLD).

Methods: Sixty-five male soldiers with HLD comprised the study cohort. A visual analogue scale for low back pain (VAS-LBP), VAS for leg radiating pain (VAS-LP), and Oswestry disability index (ODI) were applied. Lumbar MR, MRM, and myelographic findings were checked and evaluated by four independent radiologists, respectively. Each radiologist was asked to score (1 to 5) the degree of disc protrusion and nerve root compression using modified grading systems devised by the North American Spine Society and Pfirrmann and the physical examination rules for conscription in the Republic of Korea. Correlated coefficients between clinical and radiological factors were calculated. Interpretational reproducibility between MRI and myelography by four bases were calculated and compared.

Results: Mean patient age was 20.5 ± 1.1. Mean VAS-LBP and VAS-LP were 6.7 ± 1.6 and 7.4 ± 1.7, respectively. Mean ODI was 48.0 ± 16.2%. Mean MRI, MRM, and myelography scores were 3.3 ± 0.9, 3.5 ± 1.0, and 3.9 ± 1.1, respectively. All scores of diagnostic performances were significantly correlated (p < 0.05). However, none of these scores reflected the severity of patients' symptoms. There was no statistical difference of interpretational reproducibility between MRI and myelography.

Conclusion: Although MRI and myelography are based on different principles, they produce similar interpretational reproducibility in young soldiers with a HLD. However, these modalities do not reflect the severity of symptoms.

Citing Articles

A Prospective Observational Study of Return to Work after Single Level Lumbar Discectomy.

Kang S, Yang J, Cho S, Cho Y, Jeon J, Choi H J Korean Neurosurg Soc. 2020; 63(6):806-813.

PMID: 33181867 PMC: 7671783. DOI: 10.3340/jkns.2020.0227.

Factors Associated With Longer Postoperative Outpatient Follow-up Duration in Patients With Single Lumbar Disc Herniation: A Noncomplicated Patient Cohort Study.

Her Y, Kang S, Cho Y, Yang J, Jeon J, Choi H Neurospine. 2018; 15(3):225-230.

PMID: 30157584 PMC: 6226128. DOI: 10.14245/ns.1836006.003.

Comparison of Root Images between Post-Myelographic Computed Tomography and Magnetic Resonance Imaging in Patients with Lumbar Radiculopathy.

Park C, Lee H, Ryu K J Korean Neurosurg Soc. 2017; 60(5):540-549.

PMID: 28881117 PMC: 5594622. DOI: 10.3340/jkns.2016.0809.008.

Usefulness of Three Dimensional Proset MR Images for Diagnosis of Symptomatic L5-S1 Foraminal and Extraforaminal Stenosis.

Kim S, Kim C, Kim M, Jung Y, Byun W J Korean Neurosurg Soc. 2013; 54(1):30-3.

PMID: 24044077 PMC: 3772283. DOI: 10.3340/jkns.2013.54.1.30.

References

Hergan K, Amann T, Vonbank H, Hefel C . MR-myelography: a comparison with conventional myelography. Eur J Radiol. 1996; 21(3):196-200. DOI: 10.1016/0720-048X(95)00730-E. View

Zhang Y, An H, Tannoury C, Thonar E, Freedman M, Anderson D . Biological treatment for degenerative disc disease: implications for the field of physical medicine and rehabilitation. Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2008; 87(9):694-702. DOI: 10.1097/PHM.0b013e31817c1945. View

Fardon D, Milette P . Nomenclature and classification of lumbar disc pathology. Recommendations of the Combined task Forces of the North American Spine Society, American Society of Spine Radiology, and American Society of Neuroradiology. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2001; 26(5):E93-E113. DOI: 10.1097/00007632-200103010-00006. View

Boye S, Schumacher J . Diagnosis of vertebral canal haematoma by myelography and spiral computer tomography in a patient with an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator contraindicating magnetic resonance imaging. Br J Anaesth. 2009; 103(1):137-8. DOI: 10.1093/bja/aep156. View

Cordier D, Wasner M, Gluecker T, Gratzl O, Merlo A . Acute paraplegia after myelography: decompensation of a herniatad thoracic disc. Br J Neurosurg. 2008; 22(5):684-6. DOI: 10.1080/02688690801911580. View

Aota Y, Niwa T, Yoshikawa K, Fujiwara A, Asada T, Saito T . Magnetic resonance imaging and magnetic resonance myelography in the presurgical diagnosis of lumbar foraminal stenosis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2007; 32(8):896-903. DOI: 10.1097/01.brs.0000259809.75760.d5. View

de Graaf I, Prak A, Bierma-Zeinstra S, Thomas S, Peul W, Koes B . Diagnosis of lumbar spinal stenosis: a systematic review of the accuracy of diagnostic tests. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2006; 31(10):1168-76. DOI: 10.1097/01.brs.0000216463.32136.7b. View

Pfirrmann C, Dora C, Schmid M, Zanetti M, Hodler J, Boos N . MR image-based grading of lumbar nerve root compromise due to disk herniation: reliability study with surgical correlation. Radiology. 2003; 230(2):583-8. DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2302021289. View

Molla E, Marti-Bonmati L, Arana E, Martinez-Bisbal M, Costa S . Magnetic resonance myelography evaluation of the lumbar spine end plates and intervertebral disks. Acta Radiol. 2005; 46(1):83-8. DOI: 10.1080/02841850510016036. View

10.

Grams A, Gempt J, Forschler A . Comparison of spinal anatomy between 3-Tesla MRI and CT-myelography under healthy and pathological conditions. Surg Radiol Anat. 2009; 32(6):581-5. DOI: 10.1007/s00276-009-0601-0. View

11.

Ramsbacher J, Schilling A, Wolf K, Brock M . Magnetic resonance myelography (MRM) as a spinal examination technique. Acta Neurochir (Wien). 1997; 139(11):1080-4. DOI: 10.1007/BF01411564. View

12.

Oconnell M, Ryan M, Powell T, Eustace S . The value of routine MR myelography at MRI of the lumbar spine. Acta Radiol. 2003; 44(6):665-72. DOI: 10.1080/02841850312331287699. View

13.

Griffith J, Wang Y, Antonio G, Choi K, Yu A, Ahuja A . Modified Pfirrmann grading system for lumbar intervertebral disc degeneration. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2007; 32(24):E708-12. DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e31815a59a0. View

14.

Videman T, Battie M, Gibbons L, Maravilla K, Manninen H, Kaprio J . Associations between back pain history and lumbar MRI findings. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2003; 28(6):582-8. DOI: 10.1097/01.BRS.0000049905.44466.73. View

15.

Goldberg A, Kershah S . Advances in imaging of vertebral and spinal cord injury. J Spinal Cord Med. 2010; 33(2):105-16. PMC: 2869279. DOI: 10.1080/10790268.2010.11689685. View

16.

Borenstein D, OMara Jr J, Boden S, Lauerman W, Jacobson A, Platenberg C . The value of magnetic resonance imaging of the lumbar spine to predict low-back pain in asymptomatic subjects : a seven-year follow-up study. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2001; 83(9):1306-11. DOI: 10.2106/00004623-200109000-00002. View

17.

Jarvik J, Hollingworth W, Heagerty P, Haynor D, Boyko E, Deyo R . Three-year incidence of low back pain in an initially asymptomatic cohort: clinical and imaging risk factors. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2005; 30(13):1541-8. DOI: 10.1097/01.brs.0000167536.60002.87. View

18.

Song K, Choi B, Kim G, Kim J . Clinical usefulness of CT-myelogram comparing with the MRI in degenerative cervical spinal disorders: is CTM still useful for primary diagnostic tool?. J Spinal Disord Tech. 2009; 22(5):353-7. DOI: 10.1097/BSD.0b013e31817df78e. View

19.

Malfair D, Beall D . Imaging the degenerative diseases of the lumbar spine. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am. 2007; 15(2):221-38, vi. DOI: 10.1016/j.mric.2007.04.001. View

20.

Feydy A, Pluot E, Guerini H, Drape J . Role of imaging in spine, hand, and wrist osteoarthritis. Rheum Dis Clin North Am. 2009; 35(3):605-49. DOI: 10.1016/j.rdc.2009.08.007. View