Cargando…

Facet joint hypertrophy is a misnomer: A retrospective study

One of the major causes of lumbar spinal canal stenosis (LSCS) has been considered facet joint hypertrophy (FJH). However, a previous study asserted that “FJH” is a misnomer because common facet joints are no smaller than degenerative facet joints; however, this hypothesis has not been effectively d...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: An, Sang Joon, Seo, Mi Sook, Choi, Soo Il, Lim, Tae-Ha, Shin, So Jin, Kang, Keum Nae, Kim, Young Uk
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Wolters Kluwer Health 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6024170/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29901623
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000011090
_version_ 1783336009972318208
author An, Sang Joon
Seo, Mi Sook
Choi, Soo Il
Lim, Tae-Ha
Shin, So Jin
Kang, Keum Nae
Kim, Young Uk
author_facet An, Sang Joon
Seo, Mi Sook
Choi, Soo Il
Lim, Tae-Ha
Shin, So Jin
Kang, Keum Nae
Kim, Young Uk
author_sort An, Sang Joon
collection PubMed
description One of the major causes of lumbar spinal canal stenosis (LSCS) has been considered facet joint hypertrophy (FJH). However, a previous study asserted that “FJH” is a misnomer because common facet joints are no smaller than degenerative facet joints; however, this hypothesis has not been effectively demonstrated. Therefore, in order to verify that FJH is a misnomer in patients with LSCS, we devised new morphological parameters that we called facet joint thickness (FJT) and facet joint cross-sectional area (FJA). We collected FJT and FJA data from 114 patients with LSCS. A total of 86 control subjects underwent lumbar magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) as part of routine medical examinations, and axial T2-weighted MRI images were obtained from all participants. We measured FJT by drawing a line along the facet area and then measuring the narrowest point at L4-L5. We measured FJA as the whole cross-sectional area of the facet joint at the stenotic L4-L5 level. The average FJT was 1.60 ± 0.36 mm in the control group and 1.11 ± 0.32 mm in the LSCS group. The average FJA was 14.46 ± 5.17 mm(2) in the control group and 9.31 ± 3.47 mm(2) in the LSCS group. Patients with LSCS had significantly lower FJTs (P < .001) and FJAs (P < .001). FJH, a misnomer, should be renamed facet joint area narrowing. Using this terminology would eliminate confusion in descriptions of the facet joint.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6024170
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher Wolters Kluwer Health
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-60241702018-07-03 Facet joint hypertrophy is a misnomer: A retrospective study An, Sang Joon Seo, Mi Sook Choi, Soo Il Lim, Tae-Ha Shin, So Jin Kang, Keum Nae Kim, Young Uk Medicine (Baltimore) Research Article One of the major causes of lumbar spinal canal stenosis (LSCS) has been considered facet joint hypertrophy (FJH). However, a previous study asserted that “FJH” is a misnomer because common facet joints are no smaller than degenerative facet joints; however, this hypothesis has not been effectively demonstrated. Therefore, in order to verify that FJH is a misnomer in patients with LSCS, we devised new morphological parameters that we called facet joint thickness (FJT) and facet joint cross-sectional area (FJA). We collected FJT and FJA data from 114 patients with LSCS. A total of 86 control subjects underwent lumbar magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) as part of routine medical examinations, and axial T2-weighted MRI images were obtained from all participants. We measured FJT by drawing a line along the facet area and then measuring the narrowest point at L4-L5. We measured FJA as the whole cross-sectional area of the facet joint at the stenotic L4-L5 level. The average FJT was 1.60 ± 0.36 mm in the control group and 1.11 ± 0.32 mm in the LSCS group. The average FJA was 14.46 ± 5.17 mm(2) in the control group and 9.31 ± 3.47 mm(2) in the LSCS group. Patients with LSCS had significantly lower FJTs (P < .001) and FJAs (P < .001). FJH, a misnomer, should be renamed facet joint area narrowing. Using this terminology would eliminate confusion in descriptions of the facet joint. Wolters Kluwer Health 2018-06-15 /pmc/articles/PMC6024170/ /pubmed/29901623 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000011090 Text en Copyright © 2018 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 Research Article
An, Sang Joon
Seo, Mi Sook
Choi, Soo Il
Lim, Tae-Ha
Shin, So Jin
Kang, Keum Nae
Kim, Young Uk
Facet joint hypertrophy is a misnomer: A retrospective study
title Facet joint hypertrophy is a misnomer: A retrospective study
title_full Facet joint hypertrophy is a misnomer: A retrospective study
title_fullStr Facet joint hypertrophy is a misnomer: A retrospective study
title_full_unstemmed Facet joint hypertrophy is a misnomer: A retrospective study
title_short Facet joint hypertrophy is a misnomer: A retrospective study
title_sort facet joint hypertrophy is a misnomer: a retrospective study
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6024170/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29901623
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000011090
work_keys_str_mv AT ansangjoon facetjointhypertrophyisamisnomeraretrospectivestudy
AT seomisook facetjointhypertrophyisamisnomeraretrospectivestudy
AT choisooil facetjointhypertrophyisamisnomeraretrospectivestudy
AT limtaeha facetjointhypertrophyisamisnomeraretrospectivestudy
AT shinsojin facetjointhypertrophyisamisnomeraretrospectivestudy
AT kangkeumnae facetjointhypertrophyisamisnomeraretrospectivestudy
AT kimyounguk facetjointhypertrophyisamisnomeraretrospectivestudy