» Articles » PMID: 35096539

High-resolution, Three-dimensional Magnetic Resonance Imaging Axial Load Dynamic Study Improves Diagnostics of the Lumbar Spine in Clinical Practice

Overview
Journal World J Orthop
Specialty Orthopedics
Date 2022 Jan 31
PMID 35096539
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: The response to axial physiological pressure due to load transfer to the lumbar spine structures is among the various back pain mechanisms. Understanding the spine adaptation to cumulative compressive forces can influence the choice of personalized treatment strategies.

Aim: To analyze the impact of axial load on the spinal canal's size, intervertebral foramina, ligamenta flava and lumbosacral alignment.

Methods: We assessed 90 patients using three-dimensional isotropic magnetic resonance imaging acquisition in a supine position with or without applying an axial compression load. Anatomical structures were measured in the lumbosacral region from L1 to S1 in lying and axially-loaded magnetic resonance images. A paired test at α = 0.05 was used to calculate the observed differences.

Results: After axial loading, the dural sac area decreased significantly, by 5.2% on average (4.1%, 6.2%, < 0.001). The intervertebral foramina decreased by 3.4% (2.7%, 4.1%, < 0.001), except for L5-S1. Ligamenta flava increased by 3.8% (2.5%, 5.2%, < 0.001), and the lumbosacral angle increased.

Conclusion: Axial load exacerbates the narrowing of the spinal canal and intervertebral foramina from L1-L2 to L4-L5. Cumulative compressive forces thicken ligamenta flava and exaggerate lumbar lordosis.

Citing Articles

Weight-bearing MRI for dynamic evaluations of spinal and neural foraminal stenosis.

Lagerstrand K Eur Radiol. 2023; 33(7):4780-4781.

PMID: 37212847 DOI: 10.1007/s00330-023-09737-3.


Associations between Patient Report of Pain and Intervertebral Foramina Changes Visible on Axial-Loaded Lumbar Magnetic Resonance Imaging.

Lorenc T, Golebiowski M, Syganiec D, Glinkowski W Diagnostics (Basel). 2022; 12(3).

PMID: 35328116 PMC: 8947043. DOI: 10.3390/diagnostics12030563.

References
1.
Balague F, Mannion A, Pellise F, Cedraschi C . Non-specific low back pain. Lancet. 2011; 379(9814):482-91. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(11)60610-7. View

2.
Hurwitz E, Randhawa K, Yu H, Cote P, Haldeman S . The Global Spine Care Initiative: a summary of the global burden of low back and neck pain studies. Eur Spine J. 2018; 27(Suppl 6):796-801. DOI: 10.1007/s00586-017-5432-9. View

3.
Lorme K, Naqvi S . Comparative analysis of low-back loading on chiropractors using various workstation table heights and performing various tasks. J Manipulative Physiol Ther. 2003; 26(1):25-33. DOI: 10.1067/mmt.2003.43. View

4.
Meucci R, Fassa A, Faria N . Prevalence of chronic low back pain: systematic review. Rev Saude Publica. 2015; 49. PMC: 4603263. DOI: 10.1590/S0034-8910.2015049005874. View

5.
Schonstrom N, Bolender N, Spengler D . The pathomorphology of spinal stenosis as seen on CT scans of the lumbar spine. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1985; 10(9):806-11. DOI: 10.1097/00007632-198511000-00005. View