Dynamic change of dural sac cross-sectional area in axial loaded magnetic resonance imaging correlates with the severity of clinical symptoms in patients with lumbar spinal canal stenosis

Spine

Volumn 37, Issue 3, 2012, Pages 207-213

  Kanno, Haruo ^a,b   Ozawa, Hiroshi ^a   Koizumi, Yutaka ^b   Morozumi, Naoki ^b   Aizawa, Toshimi ^a   Kusakabe, Takashi ^a   Ishii, Yushin ^b   Itoi, Eiji ^a  

^a TOHOKU UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (Japan)

^b National Hospital Organization Sendai Nishitaga Hospital   (Japan)

Author keywords

axial loading; lumbar spinal canal stenosis; magnetic resonance image

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CLINICAL FEATURE; DISEASE DURATION; DISEASE SEVERITY; DURA MATER; DURAL SAC CROSS SECTIONAL AREA; FEMALE; HUMAN; JAPANESE ORTHOPAEDIC ASSOCIATION SCORE; LEG PAIN; LUMBAR SPINE; LUMBAR VERTEBRAL CANAL STENOSIS; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; NUCLEAR MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; PARESTHESIA; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SCORING SYSTEM; VERTEBRAL CANAL STENOSIS; VISUAL ANALOG SCALE; WALKING;

AGED; COHORT STUDIES; DURA MATER; FEMALE; HUMANS; LUMBAR VERTEBRAE; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; REGISTRIES; SEVERITY OF ILLNESS INDEX; SPINAL CANAL; SPINAL STENOSIS; WEIGHT-BEARING;

EID: 84856703830     PISSN: 03622436     EISSN: 15281159     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e3182134e73     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. Verbiest H. A radicular syndrome from developmental narrowing of the lumbar vertebral canal. 1954. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2001; 384: 3-9.
2. Danielson BI, Willén J, Gaulitz A, et al. Axial loading of the spine during CT and MR in patients with suspected lumbar spinal stenosis. Acta Radiol 1998; 39: 604-11. (Pubitemid 128451520)
3. Oǧuz H, Levendoǧlu F, Oǧün TC, et al. Loading is more effective than posture in lumbar spinal stenosis: a study with a treadmill equipment. Eur Spine J 2007; 16: 913-8. (Pubitemid 47063468)
4. Willén J, Danielson B, Gaulitz A, et al. Dynamic effects on the lumbar spinal canal: axially loaded CT-myelography and MRI in patients with sciatica and/or neurogenic claudication. Spine 1997; 22: 2968-76. (Pubitemid 28070643)
5. Ogikubo O, Forsberg L, Hansson T. The relationship between the cross-sectional area of the cauda equina and the preoperative symptoms in central lumbar spinal stenosis. Spine 2007; 32: 1423-8. (Pubitemid 46869909)
6. Hamanishi C, Matukura N, Fujita M, et al. Cross-sectional area of the stenotic lumbar dural tube measured from the transverse views of magnetic resonance imaging. J Spinal Disord 1994; 7: 388-93. (Pubitemid 24298120)
7. Sirvanci M, Bhatia M, Ganiyusufoglu KA, et al. Degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis: correlation with Oswestry Disability Index and MR imaging. Eur Spine J 2008; 17: 679-85.
8. Wang Y-C, Jeng C-M, Wu C-Y, et al. Dynamic effects of axial loading on the lumbar spine during magnetic resonance imaging in patients with suspected spinal stenosis. J Formos Med Assoc 2008; 107: 334-9. (Pubitemid 351663110)
9. Schönström N, Bolender NF, Spengler DM, et al. Pressure changes within the cauda equina following constriction of the dural sac. An in vitro experimental study. Spine 1984; 9: 604-7. (Pubitemid 14010212)
10. Bolender NF, Schonstrom NS, Spengler DM. Role of computed tomography and myelography in the diagnosis of central spinal stenosis. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1985; 67: 240-6. (Pubitemid 15167124)
11. Moon E-S, Kim H-S, Park J-O, et al. Comparison of the predictive value of myelography, computed tomography, and MRI on the treadmill test in lumbar spinal stenosis. Yonsei Med J 2005; 46: 806-11. (Pubitemid 43085184)
12. Zeifang F, Schiltenwolf M, Abel R, et al. Gait analysis does not correlate with clinical and MR imaging parameters in patients with symptomatic lumbar spinal stenosis. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 2008; 9: 89.
13. Geisser ME, Haig AJ, Tong HC, et al. Spinal canal size and clinical symptoms among persons diagnosed with lumbar spinal stenosis. Clin J Pain 2007; 23: 780-5. (Pubitemid 351339414)
14. Amundsen T, Weber H, Lilleas F, et al. Lumbar spinal stenosis. Clinical and radiologic features. Spine 1995; 20: 1178-86.
15. Hiwatashi A, Danielson B, Moritani T, et al. Axial loading during MR imaging can influence treatment decision for symptomatic spinal stenosis. Am J Neuroradiol 2004; 25: 170-4. (Pubitemid 38235292)
16. Willén J, Wessberg PJ, Danielsson B. Surgical results in hidden lumbar spinal stenosis detected by axial loaded computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging: an outcome study. Spine 2008; 33: E109-15. (Pubitemid 351286545)
17. Willén J, Danielson B. The diagnostic effect from axial loading of the lumbar spine during computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging in patients with degenerative disorders. Spine 2001; 26: 2607-14. (Pubitemid 33134310)
18. Danielson B, Willén J. Axially loaded magnetic resonance image of the lumbar spine in asymptomatic individuals. Spine 2001; 26: 2601-6. (Pubitemid 33134309)
19. Hansson T, Suzuki N, Hebelka H, et al. The narrowing of the lumbar spinal canal during loaded MRI: the effects of the disc and ligamentum flavum. Eur Spine J 2009; 18: 679-86.
20. Price DD, McGrath PA, Rafii A, et al. The validation of visual analogue scales as ratio scale measures for chronic and experimental pain. Pain 1983; 17: 45-56. (Pubitemid 13004473)
21. Inoue S, Kataoka H, Tajima N, et al. Assessment of treatment for low back pain. J Jpn Orthop Assoc 1986; 60: 391-4.
22. Fujiwara A, Kobayashi N, Saiki K, et al. Association of the Japanese Orthopaedic Association score with the Oswestry Disability Index, Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire, and short-form 36. Spine 2003; 28: 1601-7. (Pubitemid 36877098)
23. Tadokoro K, Miyamoto H, Sumi M, et al. The prognosis of conservative treatments for lumbar spinal stenosis: analysis of patients over 70 years of age. Spine 2005; 30: 2458-63. (Pubitemid 41567612)
24. Kawaguchi Y, Kanamori M, Ishihara H, et al. Clinical symptoms and surgical outcome in lumbar spinal stenosis patients with neuropathic bladder. J Spinal Disord 2001; 14: 404-10. (Pubitemid 32946144)
25. Lohman CM, Tallroth K, Kettunen JA, et al. Comparison of radiologic signs and clinical symptoms of spinal stenosis. Spine 2006; 31: 1834-40. (Pubitemid 44079513)
26. Kanno H, Endo T, Ozawa H, et al. Axial loading during magnetic resonance imaging in patients with lumbar spinal canal stenosis: Does it reproduce the positional change of the dural sac detected by upright myelography [published online ahead of print January 20, 2011]? Spine. DOI:10.1097/BRS. 0b013e31821038f2.
27. Mousavi SJ, Parnianpour M, Montazeri A, et al. Translation and validation study of the Iranian versions of the Neck Disability Index and the Neck Pain and Disability Scale. Spine 2007; 32: E825-31. (Pubitemid 350307306)
28. Schönström N, Lindahl S, Willén J, et al. Dynamic changes in the dimensions of the lumbar spinal canal: an experimental study in vitro. J Orthop Res 1989; 7: 115-21. (Pubitemid 19024709)
29. Saifuddin A. The imaging of lumbar spinal stenosis. Clin Radiol 2000; 55: 581-94. (Pubitemid 32054581)
30. Wilmink JT. CT morphology of intrathecal lumbosacral nerve-root compression. Am J Neuroradiol 1989; 10: 233-48. (Pubitemid 19082612)
31. Weishaupt D, Schmid MR, Zanetti M, et al. Positional MR imaging of the lumbar spine: does it demonstrate nerve root compromise not visible at conventional MR imaging ? Radiology 2000; 215: 247-53. (Pubitemid 30190538)
32. Zamani AA, Moriarty T, Hsu L, et al. Functional MRI of the lumbar spine in erect position in a superconducting open-configuration MR system: preliminary results. J Magn Reson Imaging 1998; 8: 1329-33. (Pubitemid 28533679)
33. Madsen R, Jensen TS, Pope M, et al. The effect of body position and axial load on spinal canal morphology: an MRI study of central spinal stenosis. Spine 2008; 33: 61-7.