The aim of this study was to determine the differences in spinal imaging characteristics between subjects with or without lumbar developmental spinal stenosis (DSS) in a population-based cohort. This was a radiological analysis of 2,387 participants who underwent L1-S1 MRI. Means and ranges were calculated for age, sex, BMI, and MRI measurements. Anteroposterior (AP) vertebral canal diameters were used to differentiate those with DSS from controls. Other imaging parameters included vertebral body dimensions, spinal canal dimensions, disc degeneration scores, and facet joint orientation. Mann-Whitney U and chi-squared tests were conducted to search for measurement differences between those with DSS and controls. In order to identify possible associations between DSS and MRI parameters, those who were statistically significant in the univariate binary logistic regression were included in a multivariate stepwise logistic regression after adjusting for demographics. Odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were reported where appropriate.Aims
Methods
To study the associations of lumbar developmental spinal stenosis (DSS) with low back pain (LBP), radicular leg pain, and disability. This was a cross-sectional study of 2,206 subjects along with L1-S1 axial and sagittal MRI. Clinical and radiological information regarding their demographics, workload, smoking habits, anteroposterior (AP) vertebral canal diameter, spondylolisthesis, and MRI changes were evaluated. Mann-Whitney U tests and chi-squared tests were conducted to search for differences between subjects with and without DSS. Associations of LBP and radicular pain reported within one month (30 days) and one year (365 days) of the MRI, with clinical and radiological information, were also investigated by utilizing univariate and multivariate logistic regressions.Aims
Methods
The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence
has issued guidelines that state fusion for non-specific low back
pain should only be performed as part of a randomised controlled
trial, and that lumbar disc replacement should not be performed.
Thus, spinal fusion and disc replacement will no longer be routine
forms of treatment for patients with low back pain. This annotation
considers the evidence upon which these guidelines are based. Cite this article:
This prospective multicentre study was undertaken
to determine segmental movement, disc height and sagittal alignment
after total disc replacement (TDR) in the lumbosacral spine and
to assess the correlation of biomechanical properties to clinical
outcomes. A total of 173 patients with degenerative disc disease and low
back pain for more than one year were randomised to receive either
TDR or multidisciplinary rehabilitation (MDR). Segmental movement
in the sagittal plane and disc height were measured using distortion
compensated roentgen analysis (DCRA) comparing radiographs in active flexion
and extension. Correlation analysis between the range of movement
or disc height and patient-reported outcomes was performed in both
groups. After two years, no significant change in movement in the
sagittal plane was found in segments with TDR or between the two
treatment groups. It remained the same or increased slightly in
untreated segments in the TDR group and in this group there was
a significant increase in disc height in the operated segments.
There was no correlation between segmental movement or disc height
and patient-reported outcomes in either group. In this study, insertion of an intervertebral disc prosthesis
TDR did not increase movement in the sagittal plane and segmental
movement did not correlate with patient-reported outcomes. This
suggests that in the lumbar spine the movement preserving properties
of TDR are not major determinants of clinical outcomes. Cite this article:
We conducted a prospective follow-up MRI study
of originally asymptomatic healthy subjects to clarify the development
of
