Cargando…
Dural sac area is a more sensitive parameter for evaluating lumbar spinal stenosis than spinal canal area: A retrospective study
Narrowing of the dural sac cross-sectional area (DSCSA) and spinal canal cross-sectional area (SCCSA) have been considered major causes of lumbar central canal spinal stenosis (LCCSS). DSCSA and SCCSA were previously correlated with subjective walking distance before claudication occurs, aging, and...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Wolters Kluwer Health
2017
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5728944/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29245329 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000009087 |
_version_ | 1783286115253354496 |
---|---|
author | Lim, Young Su Mun, Jong-Uk Seo, Mi Sook Sang, Bo-Hyun Bang, Yun-Sic Kang, Keum Nae Koh, Jin Woo Kim, Young Uk |
author_facet | Lim, Young Su Mun, Jong-Uk Seo, Mi Sook Sang, Bo-Hyun Bang, Yun-Sic Kang, Keum Nae Koh, Jin Woo Kim, Young Uk |
author_sort | Lim, Young Su |
collection | PubMed |
description | Narrowing of the dural sac cross-sectional area (DSCSA) and spinal canal cross-sectional area (SCCSA) have been considered major causes of lumbar central canal spinal stenosis (LCCSS). DSCSA and SCCSA were previously correlated with subjective walking distance before claudication occurs, aging, and disc degeneration. DSCSA and SCCSA have been ideal morphological parameters for evaluating LCCSS. However, the comparative value of these parameters is unknown and no studies have evaluated the clinical optimal cut-off values of DSCSA and SCCSA. This study assessed which parameter is more sensitive. Both DSCSA and SCCSA samples were collected from 135 patients with LCCSS, and from 130 control subjects who underwent lumbar magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) as part of a medical examination. Axial T2-weighted MRI scans were acquired at the level of facet joint from each subject. DSCSA and SCCSA were measured at the L4-L5 intervertebral level on MRI using a picture archiving and communications system. The average DSCSA value was 151.67 ± 53.59 mm(2) in the control group and 80.04 ± 35.36 mm(2) in the LCCSS group. The corresponding average SCCSA values were 199.95 ± 60.96 and 119.17 ± 49.41 mm(2). LCCSS patients had significantly lower DSCSA and SCCSA (both P < .001). Regarding the validity of both DSCSA and SCCSA as predictors of LCCSS, Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis revealed an optimal cut-off value for DSCSA of 111.09 mm(2), with 80.0% sensitivity, 80.8% specificity, and an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.87 (95% confidence interval, 0.83–0.92). The best cut off-point of SCCSA was 147.12 mm(2), with 74.8% sensitivity, 78.5% specificity, and AUC of 0.85 (95% confidence interval, 0.81–0.89). DSCSA and SCCSA were both significantly associated with LCCSS, with DSCSA being a more sensitive measurement parameter. Thus, to evaluate LCCSS patients, pain specialists should more carefully investigate the DSCSA than SCCSA. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5728944 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2017 |
publisher | Wolters Kluwer Health |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-57289442017-12-20 Dural sac area is a more sensitive parameter for evaluating lumbar spinal stenosis than spinal canal area: A retrospective study Lim, Young Su Mun, Jong-Uk Seo, Mi Sook Sang, Bo-Hyun Bang, Yun-Sic Kang, Keum Nae Koh, Jin Woo Kim, Young Uk Medicine (Baltimore) 3300 Narrowing of the dural sac cross-sectional area (DSCSA) and spinal canal cross-sectional area (SCCSA) have been considered major causes of lumbar central canal spinal stenosis (LCCSS). DSCSA and SCCSA were previously correlated with subjective walking distance before claudication occurs, aging, and disc degeneration. DSCSA and SCCSA have been ideal morphological parameters for evaluating LCCSS. However, the comparative value of these parameters is unknown and no studies have evaluated the clinical optimal cut-off values of DSCSA and SCCSA. This study assessed which parameter is more sensitive. Both DSCSA and SCCSA samples were collected from 135 patients with LCCSS, and from 130 control subjects who underwent lumbar magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) as part of a medical examination. Axial T2-weighted MRI scans were acquired at the level of facet joint from each subject. DSCSA and SCCSA were measured at the L4-L5 intervertebral level on MRI using a picture archiving and communications system. The average DSCSA value was 151.67 ± 53.59 mm(2) in the control group and 80.04 ± 35.36 mm(2) in the LCCSS group. The corresponding average SCCSA values were 199.95 ± 60.96 and 119.17 ± 49.41 mm(2). LCCSS patients had significantly lower DSCSA and SCCSA (both P < .001). Regarding the validity of both DSCSA and SCCSA as predictors of LCCSS, Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis revealed an optimal cut-off value for DSCSA of 111.09 mm(2), with 80.0% sensitivity, 80.8% specificity, and an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.87 (95% confidence interval, 0.83–0.92). The best cut off-point of SCCSA was 147.12 mm(2), with 74.8% sensitivity, 78.5% specificity, and AUC of 0.85 (95% confidence interval, 0.81–0.89). DSCSA and SCCSA were both significantly associated with LCCSS, with DSCSA being a more sensitive measurement parameter. Thus, to evaluate LCCSS patients, pain specialists should more carefully investigate the DSCSA than SCCSA. Wolters Kluwer Health 2017-12-08 /pmc/articles/PMC5728944/ /pubmed/29245329 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000009087 Text en Copyright © 2017 the Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0 (CCBY), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 |
spellingShingle | 3300 Lim, Young Su Mun, Jong-Uk Seo, Mi Sook Sang, Bo-Hyun Bang, Yun-Sic Kang, Keum Nae Koh, Jin Woo Kim, Young Uk Dural sac area is a more sensitive parameter for evaluating lumbar spinal stenosis than spinal canal area: A retrospective study |
title | Dural sac area is a more sensitive parameter for evaluating lumbar spinal stenosis than spinal canal area: A retrospective study |
title_full | Dural sac area is a more sensitive parameter for evaluating lumbar spinal stenosis than spinal canal area: A retrospective study |
title_fullStr | Dural sac area is a more sensitive parameter for evaluating lumbar spinal stenosis than spinal canal area: A retrospective study |
title_full_unstemmed | Dural sac area is a more sensitive parameter for evaluating lumbar spinal stenosis than spinal canal area: A retrospective study |
title_short | Dural sac area is a more sensitive parameter for evaluating lumbar spinal stenosis than spinal canal area: A retrospective study |
title_sort | dural sac area is a more sensitive parameter for evaluating lumbar spinal stenosis than spinal canal area: a retrospective study |
topic | 3300 |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5728944/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29245329 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000009087 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT limyoungsu duralsacareaisamoresensitiveparameterforevaluatinglumbarspinalstenosisthanspinalcanalareaaretrospectivestudy AT munjonguk duralsacareaisamoresensitiveparameterforevaluatinglumbarspinalstenosisthanspinalcanalareaaretrospectivestudy AT seomisook duralsacareaisamoresensitiveparameterforevaluatinglumbarspinalstenosisthanspinalcanalareaaretrospectivestudy AT sangbohyun duralsacareaisamoresensitiveparameterforevaluatinglumbarspinalstenosisthanspinalcanalareaaretrospectivestudy AT bangyunsic duralsacareaisamoresensitiveparameterforevaluatinglumbarspinalstenosisthanspinalcanalareaaretrospectivestudy AT kangkeumnae duralsacareaisamoresensitiveparameterforevaluatinglumbarspinalstenosisthanspinalcanalareaaretrospectivestudy AT kohjinwoo duralsacareaisamoresensitiveparameterforevaluatinglumbarspinalstenosisthanspinalcanalareaaretrospectivestudy AT kimyounguk duralsacareaisamoresensitiveparameterforevaluatinglumbarspinalstenosisthanspinalcanalareaaretrospectivestudy |