False-positive findings on lumbar discography: Reliability of subjective concordance assessment during provocative disc injection

Spine

Volumn 24, Issue 23, 1999, Pages 2542-2547

  Carragee, Eugene J ^a,b   Tanner, Gary M ^a   Yang, Benjamin ^a   Brito, Jorge L ^a   Truong, Thao ^a  

^a STANFORD UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^b STANFORD UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Back pain; Diagnosis; Discography; Intervertebral disc

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; BONE GRAFT; CONTROLLED STUDY; DISKOGRAPHY; HUMAN; HUMAN EXPERIMENT; ILIAC CREST; LOW BACK PAIN; LUMBAR DISK; MALE; NOCICEPTION; NORMAL HUMAN; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; PAIN ASSESSMENT; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PSYCHOMETRY; RELIABILITY; SPINE RADIOGRAPHY;

ADULT; FALSE POSITIVE REACTIONS; HUMANS; INTERVERTEBRAL DISK; LOW BACK PAIN; LUMBAR VERTEBRAE; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PAIN MEASUREMENT;

EID: 0033434056     PISSN: 03622436     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/00007632-199912010-00017     Document Type: Article

References (18)

1. Carragee E, Tanner C, Khurana S, et al. False positive lumbar discography in select patients without low back pain. Spine. In press.
2. Carragee E, Tanner C, Vittum D, et al. Positive Provocative Discography as a Misleading Finding in the Evaluation of Low Back Pain. Chicago, IL: North American Spine Society 1997:388.
3. Holt E. The question of discography. J Bone Joint Surg [Am] 1967;50:720-6.
4. Kibler R. Nathan P. Relief of pain and paraesthesiae by nerve block distal to a lesion. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 1960;23:91-8.
5. Lenz F. The sensation of angina can be evoked by stimulation of the human thalamus. Pain 1994;59:119-25.
6. Lenz F, Gracely R, Romanoski A, Hope EJ, Rowland LH, Dougherty PM. Simulation in the somatosensory thalamus can reproduce both the affective adn sensory dimensions of previously experienced pain. Nature Medicine 1995;1:910-3.
7. Main C. The modified somatic perception questionnaire. J Psychosom Res 1983;27:503-14.
8. Main C, Wood P, Hollis S, et al. The distress and risk assessment method (DRAM): A simple patient classification to identify distress and evaluate the risk of a poor outcome. Spine 1992;17:42-52.
9. Massie W, Stevens D. A Critical Evaluation of Discography. J Bone Joint Surg [Am] 1967;49:1243-4.
10. Mersky H, Bogduk N, eds. Classification of Chronic Pain Syndroms and Definition of Pain Terms. Seattle, WA: IASP Press, 1994:180-1.
11. Moneta G, Videman T, Kaivanto K, et al. Reported pain during lumbar discography as a function of anular ruptures and disc degeneration: A Reanalysis of 833 discograms. Spine 1994;19:1968-74.
12. North R, Kidd D, Zahurak M, et al. Specificity of diagnostic nerve blocks: A prospective, randomized study of sciatica due to lumbosacral spine disease. Pain 1996;65:77-85.
13. Sachs B, Vanharanta H, Spivey M, et al. Dallas Discogram Description: A new classification of CT/discography in low-back disorders. Spine 1987;12:287-84.
14. Schwarzer A, Aprill C, Derby R, et al. The prevalence and clinical features of internal disc disruption in patients with chronic LBP. Spine 1995;20:1878-83.
15. Schwarzer A, Bogduk N. Letter. Spine 1996;21:776.
16. Siddle P, Cousins M. Spinal pain mechanisms. Spine 1997;22:98-104.
17. Walsh T, Weinstein J, Spratt K, et al. Lumbar discography in normal subjects: A controlled prospective study. J Bone Joint Surg [Am] 1990;72:1081-8.
18. Zung W. A self-rated depression scale. Arch Gen Psychiatry 1965;32:63-70.