Numerous classification systems have been proposed to interpret lumbar MRI scans. The clinical impact of the measured parameters remains unclear. To evaluate the clinical significance of imaging results in patients with multisegmental degenerative pathologies, treating specialists can perform image-guided local injections to target defined areas such as the epidural space.
OBJECTIVE:
The aim of this retrospective study was to evaluate the correlation between lumbar spinal stenosis measurements obtained by MRI and improvement obtained through local epidural injection.
METHODS:
In this retrospective study various measurement and classification systems for lumbar spinal stenosis were applied to MRI scans of 100 patients with this pathological condition. The reported effect of epidural bupivacaine/triamcinolone injections at the site was recorded in these patients and a comparative analysis performed.
RESULTS:
MRI features assessed in this study did not show any relevant correlation with reported pain relief after epidural injection in patients with chronic lumbar stenosis, with the exception of posterior disc height with a weak Kendall’s tau of 0.187 ( 0.009).
CONCLUSIONS:
Although MRI is crucial for evaluating lumbar spinal stenosis, it cannot replace but is rather complementary to a good patient history and clinical examination or the results of local diagnostic injections.
DeyoRAGrayDTKreuterWMirzaSMartinBI. United States trends in lumbar fusion surgery for degenerative conditions. Spine (Phila Pa 1976).2005; 30(12): 1441-5; discussion 6–7.
2.
DeyoRAMirzaSKTurnerJAMartinBI. Overtreating chronic back pain: time to back off? J Am Board Fam Med.2009; 22(1): 62-8.
3.
LurieJDBirkmeyerNJWeinsteinJN. Rates of advanced spinal imaging and spine surgery. Spine (Phila Pa 1976).2003; 28(6): 616-20.
4.
KellerRBAtlasSJSouleDNSingerDEDeyoRA. Relationship between rates and outcomes of operative treatment for lumbar disc herniation and spinal stenosis. J Bone Joint Surg Am.1999; 81(6): 752-62.
5.
FuMCBuerbaRALongWD, 3rdBlizzardDJLischukAWHaimsAH, et al. Interrater and intrarater agreements of magnetic resonance imaging findings in the lumbar spine: significant variability across degenerative conditions. Spine J.2014; 14(10): 2442-8.
6.
WinklhoferSHeldUBurgstallerJMFinkenstaedtTBologNUlrichN, et al. Degenerative lumbar spinal canal stenosis: intra- and inter-reader agreement for magnetic resonance imaging parameters. Eur Spine J.2017; 26(2): 353-61.
7.
WeberCRaoVGulatiSKvistadKANygaardOPLonneG. Inter- and intraobserver agreement of morphological grading for central lumbar spinal stenosis on magnetic resonance imaging. Global Spine J.2015; 5(5): 406-10.
8.
ParkHJKimSSLeeSYParkNHRhoMHHongHP, et al. Clinical correlation of a new MR imaging method for assessing lumbar foraminal stenosis. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol.2012; 33(5): 818-22.
9.
ParkHJKimSSLeeYJLeeSYParkNHChoiYJ, et al. Clinical correlation of a new practical MRI method for assessing central lumbar spinal stenosis. Br J Radiol.2013; 86(1025): 20120180.
10.
GoniVGHampannavarAGopinathanNRSinghPSudeshPLogithasanRK, et al. Comparison of the oswestry disability index and magnetic resonance imaging findings in lumbar canal stenosis: an observational study. Asian Spine J.2014; 8(1): 44-50.
11.
KimYUKongYGLeeJCheongYKimSKimHK, et al. Clinical symptoms of lumbar spinal stenosis associated with morphological parameters on magnetic resonance images. Eur Spine J.2015; 24(10): 2236-43.
12.
SirvanciMBhatiaMGaniyusufogluKADuranCTezerMOzturkC, et al. Degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis: correlation with Oswestry Disability Index and MR imaging. Eur Spine J.2008; 17(5): 679-85.
13.
YuanSZouYLiYChenMYueY. A clinically relevant MRI grading system for lumbar central canal stenosis. Clin Imaging.2016; 40(6): 1140-5.
14.
KuittinenPSipolaPLeinonenVSaariTSinikallioSSavolainenS, et al. Preoperative MRI findings predict two-year postoperative clinical outcome in lumbar spinal stenosis. PLoS One.2014; 9(9): e106404.
15.
WeberCGiannadakisCRaoVJakolaASNerlandUNygaardOP, et al. Is there an association between radiological severity of lumbar spinal stenosis and disability, pain, or surgical outcome? A multicenter observational study. Spine (Phila Pa 1976).2016; 41(2): E78-83.
16.
BodenSDDavisDODinaTSPatronasNJWieselSW. Abnormal magnetic-resonance scans of the lumbar spine in asymptomatic subjects. A prospective investigation. J Bone Joint Surg Am.1990; 72(3): 403-8.
17.
CosgroveJLBertoletMChaseSLCosgroveGK. Epidural steroid injections in the treatment of lumbar spinal stenosis efficacy and predictability of successful response. Am J Phys Med Rehabil.2011; 90(12): 1050-5.
18.
ParkCHLeeSH. Correlation between severity of lumbar spinal stenosis and lumbar epidural steroid injection. Pain Med.2014; 15(4): 556-61.
19.
PloumisATransfeldtEEGilbertTJMehbodAAPintoMRDenisF. Radiculopathy in degenerative lumbar scoliosis: correlation of stenosis with relief from selective nerve root steroid injections. Pain Med.2011; 12(1): 45-50.
20.
HofmannUKGesickiMMittagF. Inpatient gradual diagnostics and its relevance for determining treatment strategies in lumbar back pain. BMC Musculoskelet Disord.2016; 17: 275.
21.
KayserRMahlfeldKHeydeCE. Concepts of in-patient gradual diagnostics for patients with lumbar back-pain. Orthopade.2008; 37(4): 285-99.
22.
HasegawaTAnHSHaughtonVMNowickiBH. Lumbar foraminal stenosis: critical heights of the intervertebral discs and foramina. A cryomicrotome study in cadavera. J Bone Joint Surg Am.1995; 77(1): 32-8.
23.
BeersGJCarterAPLeiterBETilakSPShahRR. Interobserver discrepancies in distance measurements from lumbar spine CT scans. AJR Am J Roentgenol.1985; 144(2): 395-8.
24.
SipolaPLeinonenVNiemelainenRAaltoTVanninenRManninenH, et al. Visual and quantitative assessment of lateral lumbar spinal canal stenosis with magnetic resonance imaging. Acta Radiol.2011; 52(9): 1024-31.
25.
LeeSLeeJWYeomJSKimKJKimHJChungSK, et al. A practical MRI grading system for lumbar foraminal stenosis. AJR Am J Roentgenol.2010; 194(4): 1095-8.
26.
KunogiJHasueM. Diagnosis and operative treatment of intraforaminal and extraforaminal nerve root compression. Spine (Phila Pa 1976).1991; 16(11): 1312-20.
27.
HerzogRJKaiserJASaalJASaalJS. The importance of posterior epidural fat pad in lumbar central canal stenosis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976).1991; 16(6 Suppl): S227-33.
28.
VerbiestH. The significance and principles of computerized axial tomography in idiopathic developmental stenosis of the bony lumbar vertebral canal. Spine (Phila Pa 1976).1979; 4(4): 369-78.
29.
UllrichCGBinetEFSaneckiMGKiefferSA. Quantitative assessment of the lumbar spinal canal by computed tomography. Radiology.1980; 134(1): 137-43.
30.
KalichmanLColeRKimDHLiLSuriPGuermaziA, et al. Spinal stenosis prevalence and association with symptoms: the Framingham Study. Spine J.2009; 9(7): 545-50.
31.
HamanishiCMatukuraNFujitaMTomiharaMTanakaS. Cross-sectional area of the stenotic lumbar dural tube measured from the transverse views of magnetic resonance imaging. J Spinal Disord.1994; 7(5): 388-93.
32.
LaurencinCTLipsonSJSenatusPBotchweyEJonesTRKorisM, et al. The stenosis ratio: a new tool for the diagnosis of degenerative spinal stenosis. Int J Surg Investig.1999; 1(2): 127-31.
33.
SchonstromNLindahlSWillenJHanssonT. Dynamic changes in the dimensions of the lumbar spinal canal: an experimental study in vitro. J Orthop Res.1989; 7(1): 115-21.
34.
SchizasCTheumannNBurnATanseyRWardlawDSmithFW, et al. Qualitative grading of severity of lumbar spinal stenosis based on the morphology of the dural sac on magnetic resonance images. Spine (Phila Pa 1976).2010; 35(21): 1919-24.
35.
LeeGYLeeJWChoiHSOhKJKangHS. A new grading system of lumbar central canal stenosis on MRI: an easy and reliable method. Skeletal Radiol.2011; 40(8): 1033-9.
36.
PathriaMSartorisDJResnickD. Osteoarthritis of the facet joints: accuracy of oblique radiographic assessment. Radiology.1987; 164(1): 227-30.
37.
WeishauptDZanettiMBoosNHodlerJ. MR imaging and CT in osteoarthritis of the lumbar facet joints. Skeletal Radiol.1999; 28(4): 215-9.
38.
GoubertDOosterwijckJVMeeusMDanneelsL. Structural changes of lumbar muscles in non-specific low back pain: a systematic review. Pain Physician.2016; 19(7): E985-E1000.
39.
KannoHOzawaHKoizumiYMorozumiNAizawaTKusakabeT, et al. Dynamic change of dural sac cross-sectional area in axial loaded magnetic resonance imaging correlates with the severity of clinical symptoms in patients with lumbar spinal canal stenosis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976).2012; 37(3): 207-13.
40.
LohmanCMTallrothKKettunenJALindgrenKA. Comparison of radiologic signs and clinical symptoms of spinal stenosis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976).2006; 31(16): 1834-40.
41.
BodenSD. Commentary: Interrater and intrarater agreements of magnetic resonance imaging findings in the lumbar spine. Spine J.2014; 14(10): 2449-50.
