Purpose and Background:. The spread of upright MRi scanning is a relatively new development in the UK. However, there is a lack of information about whether weight bearing scans confer any additional useful information for low back conditions. Methods and Results:. Forty-five patient referrals to the upright MRI Department at the AECC for weight bearing lumbar spine scans between November 1. st. 2014 and June 30. th. 2015, and the resulting radiologists' reports were reviewed. Age, gender, clinical history, summary of findings, type of weight bearing scanning performed (sitting, standing, flexion, extension) were abstracted. All patients were scanned in a 0.5T Paramed MRopen scanner and all also received supine lumbar spine sagittal and axial scans. The patients comprised 18 females and 27 males, mean age 52 years, (SD 15.5). Thirty had leg pain, 6 of which was bilateral. In 15, a stenotic lesion was suspected. Other reasons for referral were; possible malignancy (1), effects of degenerative change (4), spondylolisthesis (2), fracture, (1), previous surgery (3), trauma (1), sacroiliitis (1) and instability (3). In 12/45 cases, reportable findings were more prominent, and sometimes only identifiable, on weight bearing scans, while in a further 4, the reverse was true. All but one of these involved disruption of the spinal or root canals. Eight of them also involved positional alignment. Conclusion:. In this case series nearly a third of referred patients had reportable findings relating to the spinal or nerve root canals that were differentiated by upright MRI scans

Purpose and background. Static plain radiographs at the end of uncontrolled bending are the current standard of care for measuring translatory slip in back pain patients. Quantitative fluoroscopy systems (QF) that employ standardised bending protocols have been found to improve precision and reduce dose, but comparative data are lacking. We compared 4 QF methods with static radiographs in a control population, calculating ranges, population variation and measurement errors over 6 weeks. Methods. Fifty-four healthy controls (F=22, M=23) received passive recumbent and active weight bearing QF screenings during controlled motion, plus still fluoro imaging in neutral, flexion and extension. The translatory slip of all levels from L2-S1 was determined for each condition using bespoke image tracking codes (Matlab) and pooled to provide means and ranges of variation (+/-1.96SD). The pooled measurement error, or minimal detectable change (MDC. 95. ), reflecting the intra subject repeatability over 6 weeks was calculated. Ranges of translation for each level (L2-S1), for each type of motion were also calculated. Results. Static radiographs at the end of uncontrolled flexion gave the greatest variation and the worst repeatability, while QF recumbent passive and active weight bearing motion with flexion recorded during the motion had ¼ less variation and twice the repeatability. For individual levels, L2-3 had significantly higher flexion ranges in controlled motion than uncontrolled motion, whereas the converse was true at L4-5 (P<0.001). Conclusion. Dynamic QF measurement of flexion translatory slip gives ¼ less population variation and half the measurement error of static radiographs when measured in the same participants. No conflicts of interest. No funding obtained

Purpose and Background. This pilot study aimed to determine the accuracy of lumbar spine combined movement (CM) testing for diagnosing facet joint mediated pain, by comparing CM to medial branch blocks (MBB) - the gold standard in the diagnosis of facet joint pain. A regular compression pattern of CM combines active extension and lateral flexion, which is believed to compress the facet joints greater than physiological uni-planar movements. Method and Results. 96 patients attending a pain clinic day case unit for diagnostic MBB were recruited. Patients' pain responses to CMs were measured prior to and thirty minutes following MBB. The effect of weight bearing and recumbence, RMDQ, EQ-5D and MYMOP were also measured. The regular compression CM test had 80% sensitivity (95%CI: 71% to 89%) and 50% specificity (95%CI: 28% to 71%). The regular compression CM group had the largest pre-post VAS difference (median 4 points). The patients whose pain was not relieved in recumbence (n=15) showed a significant VAS difference of 6 points p=0.001). There was a significant positive correlation between the pre and post pain scores, p<0.001. There was no association between MBB response and RMDQ, EQ-5D, MYMOP scores, duration of symptoms or standing as a provoking activity. Conclusion. Regular compression CM testing can be used as a diagnostic tool to identify patients with facet joint mediated pain, particularly when associated with high pain scores. Low back pain (LBP) provoked by standing and relieved with recumbence are common features in the LBP population but are not indicators of facet joint pathology, contrary to many clinicians' beliefs