Dural sac cross-sectional area and morphological grade show significant associations with patient-rated outcome of surgery for lumbar central spinal stenosis

被引:35
作者
Mannion, A. F. [1 ]
Fekete, T. F. [2 ]
Pacifico, D. [1 ]
O'Riordan, D. [1 ]
Nauer, S. [1 ]
von Bueren, M. [1 ]
Schizas, C. [3 ]
机构
[1] Schulthess Klin, Dept Teaching Res & Dev, Lengghalde 2, CH-8008 Zurich, Switzerland
[2] Schulthess Klin, Spine Ctr, Lengghalde 2, CH-8008 Zurich, Switzerland
[3] Clin Cecil, CH-1003 Lausanne, Switzerland
关键词
Lumbar central spinal stenosis; Patient-rated outcome; Morphological grade; Dural sac cross-sectional area; MRI; OSWESTRY DISABILITY INDEX; MAGNETIC-RESONANCE IMAGES; LOW-BACK-PAIN; CLINICAL SYMPTOMS; CANAL STENOSIS; DECISION-MAKING; SEVERITY; PARAMETERS; COMPLICATIONS; DECOMPRESSION;
D O I
10.1007/s00586-017-5280-7
中图分类号
R74 [神经病学与精神病学];
学科分类号
摘要
Purpose Lumbar central spinal stenosis (LSS) is one of the most common reasons for spine surgery in the elderly patient. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) represents the gold standard for the assessment of LSS and can be used to obtain quantitative measures of the dural sac cross-sectional area (DCSA) or qualitative measures (morphological grades A-D) of the rootlet/cerebrospinal fluid ratio. This study investigated the intercorrelation between these two MRI evaluation methods and explored their respective relationships with the patient baseline clinical status and outcome 12 months after surgery. Methods This was a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data from 157 patients (88 male, 69 female; age 72 +/- 7 years) who were undergoing first-time surgery for LSS. Patients with foraminal or isolated lateral stenosis were excluded. The Core Outcome Measures Index (COMI) was completed before and 12 months after surgery. Preoperative T2 axial MRIs were blinded and independently evaluated for DCSA and morphological grade. Spearman rank correlation coefficients described the relationship between the two MRI measures of stenosis severity and between each of these and the COMI baseline and change-scores (pre to 12 months' postop). Multiple logistic regression analysis (controlling for baseline COMI, age, gender, number of operated levels, health insurance status) was used to analyse the influence of stenosis severity on the achievement of the minimum clinically important change (MCIC) score for COMI and on global treatment outcome (GTO). Results There was a correlation of rho = -0.69 (p < 0.001) between DCSA and morphological grade. There was no significant correlation between COMI baseline scores and either DCSA or morphological grades (p > 0.85). However, logistic regression revealed significant (p < 0.05) associations between stenosis ratings and 12-month outcome, whereby patients with more severe stenosis (as measured using either of the methods) benefited more from the surgery. Patients with a DCSA <75 mm(2) or morphological grade D had a 4-13-fold greater odds of achieving the MCIC for COMI or a "good" GTO, compared with patients in the least severe categories of stenosis. Conclusions Postoperative outcome was clearly related to the degree of preoperative radiological LSS. The two MRI methods appeared to deliver similar information, as given by the relatively strong correlation between them and their comparable performance in relation to baseline and 12-month outcomes. However, the qualitative morphological grading can be performed in an instant, without measurement tools, and does not deliver less clinically useful information than the more complex and time-consuming measures; as such, it may represent the preferred method in the clinical routine for assessing the extent of radiological stenosis and the likelihood of a positive outcome after decompression.
引用
收藏
页码:2552 / 2564
页数:13
相关论文
共 43 条
  • [1] Preoperative predictors for postoperative clinical outcome in lumbar spinal stenosis -: Systematic review
    Aalto, Timo J.
    Malmivaara, Antti
    Kovacs, Francisco
    Herno, Arto
    Alen, Markku
    Salmi, Liisa
    Kroger, Heikki
    Andrade, Juan
    Jimenez, Rosa
    Tapaninaho, Antti
    Turunen, Veli
    Savolainen, Sakari
    Airaksinen, Olavi
    [J]. SPINE, 2006, 31 (18) : E648 - E663
  • [2] Aebi M., 2008, SPINAL DISORDERS
  • [3] Consensus conference on core radiological parameters to describe lumbar stenosis - an initiative for structured reporting
    Andreisek, Gustav
    Deyo, Richard A.
    Jarvik, Jeffrey G.
    Porchet, Francois
    Winklhofer, Sebastian F. X.
    Steurer, Johann
    [J]. EUROPEAN RADIOLOGY, 2014, 24 (12) : 3224 - 3232
  • [4] Uncertainties in the Diagnosis of Lumbar Spinal Stenosis
    Andreisek, Gustav
    Hodler, Juerg
    Steurer, Johann
    [J]. RADIOLOGY, 2011, 261 (03) : 681 - 684
  • [5] Azimi P, 2013, RES MED, V36, P183
  • [6] Decision-making process in patients with lumbar spinal canal stenosis
    Azimi, Parisa
    Mohammadi, Hassan R.
    Benzel, Edward C.
    Shahzadi, Shorab
    Azhari, Shirzad
    Montazeri, Ali
    [J]. JOURNAL OF NEUROSURGICAL SCIENCES, 2017, 61 (04) : 388 - 394
  • [7] Clinical validity of the nerve root sedimentation sign in patients with suspected lumbar spinal stenosis
    Barz, Thomas
    Staub, Lukas P.
    Melloh, Markus
    Hamann, Gregor
    Lord, Sarah J.
    Chatfield, Mark D.
    Bossuyt, Patrick M.
    Lange, Joern
    Merk, Harry R.
    [J]. SPINE JOURNAL, 2014, 14 (04) : 667 - 674
  • [8] Is There an Association Between Pain and Magnetic Resonance Imaging Parameters in Patients With Lumbar Spinal Stenosis?
    Burgstaller, Jakob M.
    Schuffler, Peter J.
    Buhmann, Joachim M.
    Andreisek, Gustav
    Winklhofer, Sebastian
    Del Grande, Filippo
    Mattle, Michele
    Brunner, Florian
    Karakoumis, Georgios
    Steurer, Johann
    Held, Ulrike
    [J]. SPINE, 2016, 41 (17) : E1053 - E1062
  • [9] An assessment of surgery for spinal stenosis: Time trends, geographic variations, complications, and reoperations
    Ciol, MA
    Deyo, RA
    Howell, E
    Kreif, S
    [J]. JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN GERIATRICS SOCIETY, 1996, 44 (03) : 285 - 290
  • [10] Citrome Leslie, 2014, Innov Clin Neurosci, V11, P26