Cargando…
Can Conventional Magnetic Resonance Imaging Substitute Three-Dimensional Magnetic Resonance Imaging in the Diagnosis of Lumbar Foraminal Stenosis?
STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective radiological comparative design. PURPOSE: To investigate whether conventional magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) could substitute three-dimensional (3D)-MRI for the calculation of the foraminal stenotic ratio (FSR) and clarification of which patients can be assessed more ac...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Korean Society of Spine Surgery
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8377208/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33059434 http://dx.doi.org/10.31616/asj.2020.0133 |
_version_ | 1783740609617461248 |
---|---|
author | Hasib, Maruf Mohammad Yamada, Kentaro Hoshino, Masatoshi Yamada, Eiji Tamai, Koji Takahashi, Shinji Suzuki, Akinobu Toyoda, Hiromitsu Terai, Hidetomi Nakamura, Hiroaki |
author_facet | Hasib, Maruf Mohammad Yamada, Kentaro Hoshino, Masatoshi Yamada, Eiji Tamai, Koji Takahashi, Shinji Suzuki, Akinobu Toyoda, Hiromitsu Terai, Hidetomi Nakamura, Hiroaki |
author_sort | Hasib, Maruf Mohammad |
collection | PubMed |
description | STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective radiological comparative design. PURPOSE: To investigate whether conventional magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) could substitute three-dimensional (3D)-MRI for the calculation of the foraminal stenotic ratio (FSR) and clarification of which patients can be assessed more accurately using 3D-MRI. OVERVIEW OF LITERATURE: Previous studies have indicated that 3D-MRI is useful for diagnosing lumbar foraminal stenosis. The FSR obtained using 3D-MRI, described as the ratio of stenosis length, characterized by perineural fat obliteration, to the length of the entire foramen, could indicate the stenosis severity; however, this method is time-consuming and expensive. The FSR also can be calculated using conventional MRI. METHODS: We investigated 154 foramina at L5–S1 in 77 patients. All the patients had degenerative lumbar disorders and had undergone both conventional MRI and 3D-MRI during the same visit. Differences between the FSRs calculated from conventional and 3D-MRI reconstructions and any correlations with the plain radiography findings were assessed. RESULTS: In foramina that had a FSR of <50% on conventional MRI, the difference between the FSR obtained using conventional MRI and 3D-MRI was 5.1%, with a correlation coefficient of 0.777. For foramina with a FSR ≥50% on conventional MRI, the difference was 20.2%, with a correlation coefficient of 0.54. FSR obtained using 3D-MRI was significantly greater in patients who required surgery than in those who were successfully treated with conservative methods (88% and 42%, respectively). Segments with spondylolisthesis or lateral wedging showed higher FSRs than those without these conditions on both types of MRI. CONCLUSIONS: FSRs <50% obtained using conventional MRI were sufficiently reliable; however, the results were inaccurate for FSRs ≥50%. Patients with high FSRs on 3D-MRI were more likely to require surgical treatment. Therefore, 3D-MRI is recommended in patients with suspected stenosis detected using conventional MRI or plain radiographs. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8377208 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | Korean Society of Spine Surgery |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-83772082021-08-25 Can Conventional Magnetic Resonance Imaging Substitute Three-Dimensional Magnetic Resonance Imaging in the Diagnosis of Lumbar Foraminal Stenosis? Hasib, Maruf Mohammad Yamada, Kentaro Hoshino, Masatoshi Yamada, Eiji Tamai, Koji Takahashi, Shinji Suzuki, Akinobu Toyoda, Hiromitsu Terai, Hidetomi Nakamura, Hiroaki Asian Spine J Clinical Study STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective radiological comparative design. PURPOSE: To investigate whether conventional magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) could substitute three-dimensional (3D)-MRI for the calculation of the foraminal stenotic ratio (FSR) and clarification of which patients can be assessed more accurately using 3D-MRI. OVERVIEW OF LITERATURE: Previous studies have indicated that 3D-MRI is useful for diagnosing lumbar foraminal stenosis. The FSR obtained using 3D-MRI, described as the ratio of stenosis length, characterized by perineural fat obliteration, to the length of the entire foramen, could indicate the stenosis severity; however, this method is time-consuming and expensive. The FSR also can be calculated using conventional MRI. METHODS: We investigated 154 foramina at L5–S1 in 77 patients. All the patients had degenerative lumbar disorders and had undergone both conventional MRI and 3D-MRI during the same visit. Differences between the FSRs calculated from conventional and 3D-MRI reconstructions and any correlations with the plain radiography findings were assessed. RESULTS: In foramina that had a FSR of <50% on conventional MRI, the difference between the FSR obtained using conventional MRI and 3D-MRI was 5.1%, with a correlation coefficient of 0.777. For foramina with a FSR ≥50% on conventional MRI, the difference was 20.2%, with a correlation coefficient of 0.54. FSR obtained using 3D-MRI was significantly greater in patients who required surgery than in those who were successfully treated with conservative methods (88% and 42%, respectively). Segments with spondylolisthesis or lateral wedging showed higher FSRs than those without these conditions on both types of MRI. CONCLUSIONS: FSRs <50% obtained using conventional MRI were sufficiently reliable; however, the results were inaccurate for FSRs ≥50%. Patients with high FSRs on 3D-MRI were more likely to require surgical treatment. Therefore, 3D-MRI is recommended in patients with suspected stenosis detected using conventional MRI or plain radiographs. Korean Society of Spine Surgery 2021-08 2020-10-19 /pmc/articles/PMC8377208/ /pubmed/33059434 http://dx.doi.org/10.31616/asj.2020.0133 Text en Copyright © 2021 by Korean Society of Spine Surgery https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) ) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Clinical Study Hasib, Maruf Mohammad Yamada, Kentaro Hoshino, Masatoshi Yamada, Eiji Tamai, Koji Takahashi, Shinji Suzuki, Akinobu Toyoda, Hiromitsu Terai, Hidetomi Nakamura, Hiroaki Can Conventional Magnetic Resonance Imaging Substitute Three-Dimensional Magnetic Resonance Imaging in the Diagnosis of Lumbar Foraminal Stenosis? |
title | Can Conventional Magnetic Resonance Imaging Substitute Three-Dimensional Magnetic Resonance Imaging in the Diagnosis of Lumbar Foraminal Stenosis? |
title_full | Can Conventional Magnetic Resonance Imaging Substitute Three-Dimensional Magnetic Resonance Imaging in the Diagnosis of Lumbar Foraminal Stenosis? |
title_fullStr | Can Conventional Magnetic Resonance Imaging Substitute Three-Dimensional Magnetic Resonance Imaging in the Diagnosis of Lumbar Foraminal Stenosis? |
title_full_unstemmed | Can Conventional Magnetic Resonance Imaging Substitute Three-Dimensional Magnetic Resonance Imaging in the Diagnosis of Lumbar Foraminal Stenosis? |
title_short | Can Conventional Magnetic Resonance Imaging Substitute Three-Dimensional Magnetic Resonance Imaging in the Diagnosis of Lumbar Foraminal Stenosis? |
title_sort | can conventional magnetic resonance imaging substitute three-dimensional magnetic resonance imaging in the diagnosis of lumbar foraminal stenosis? |
topic | Clinical Study |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8377208/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33059434 http://dx.doi.org/10.31616/asj.2020.0133 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT hasibmarufmohammad canconventionalmagneticresonanceimagingsubstitutethreedimensionalmagneticresonanceimaginginthediagnosisoflumbarforaminalstenosis AT yamadakentaro canconventionalmagneticresonanceimagingsubstitutethreedimensionalmagneticresonanceimaginginthediagnosisoflumbarforaminalstenosis AT hoshinomasatoshi canconventionalmagneticresonanceimagingsubstitutethreedimensionalmagneticresonanceimaginginthediagnosisoflumbarforaminalstenosis AT yamadaeiji canconventionalmagneticresonanceimagingsubstitutethreedimensionalmagneticresonanceimaginginthediagnosisoflumbarforaminalstenosis AT tamaikoji canconventionalmagneticresonanceimagingsubstitutethreedimensionalmagneticresonanceimaginginthediagnosisoflumbarforaminalstenosis AT takahashishinji canconventionalmagneticresonanceimagingsubstitutethreedimensionalmagneticresonanceimaginginthediagnosisoflumbarforaminalstenosis AT suzukiakinobu canconventionalmagneticresonanceimagingsubstitutethreedimensionalmagneticresonanceimaginginthediagnosisoflumbarforaminalstenosis AT toyodahiromitsu canconventionalmagneticresonanceimagingsubstitutethreedimensionalmagneticresonanceimaginginthediagnosisoflumbarforaminalstenosis AT teraihidetomi canconventionalmagneticresonanceimagingsubstitutethreedimensionalmagneticresonanceimaginginthediagnosisoflumbarforaminalstenosis AT nakamurahiroaki canconventionalmagneticresonanceimagingsubstitutethreedimensionalmagneticresonanceimaginginthediagnosisoflumbarforaminalstenosis |