A gaze beyond the surface: acknowledging the little we know about radiographic parameters for evaluation of lumbar spinal stenosis

AAPT Diagnostic Criteria for Chronic Low Back Pain

Chronic low back pain (CLBP) conditions are highly prevalent and constitute the leading cause of disability worldwide. The Analgesic, Anesthetic, and Addiction Clinical Trial Translations Innovations Opportunities and Networks (ACTTION) public-private partnership with the US Food and Drug Administration and the American Pain Society (APS), have combined to create the ACTTION-APS Pain Taxonomy (AAPT). The AAPT initiative convened a working group to develop diagnostic criteria for CLBP. The working group identified 3 distinct low back pain conditions which result in a vast public health burden across the lifespan. This article focuses on: 1) the axial predominant syndrome of chronic musculoskeletal low back pain, 2) the lateralized, distally-radiating syndrome of chronic lumbosacral radicular pain 3) and neurogenic claudication associated with lumbar spinal stenosis. This classification of CLBP is organized according to the AAPT multidimensional framework, specifically 1) core diagnostic criteria; 2) common features; 3) common medical and psychiatric comorbidities; 4) neurobiological, psychosocial, and functional consequences; and 5) putative neurobiological and psychosocial mechanisms, risk factors, and protective factors. PERSPECTIVE: An evidence-based classification of CLBP conditions was constructed for the AAPT initiative. This multidimensional diagnostic framework includes: 1) core diagnostic criteria; 2) common features; 3) medical and psychiatric comorbidities; 4) neurobiological, psychosocial, and functional consequences; and 5) putative neurobiological and psychosocial mechanisms, risk factors, and protective factors.

Redundant nerve roots of the cauda equina in lumbar spinal canal stenosis, an MR study on 500 cases

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to evaluate magnetic resonance (MR)-detected redundant nerve roots (RNRs) of the cauda equina in patients with lumbar spinal canal stenosis.

METHODS

A total of 500 lumbar MR studies in patients with lumbar spinal canal stenosis were reviewed for the presence and characteristics of RNRs of the cauda equina. The length of the RNRs relative to the height of the upper vertebral body of the level of the stenosis was used as a prognostic indicator.

RESULTS

RNRs were detected in 15% of the patients, the majority above the level of the stenosis (85%) and loop shaped (72%). Advanced age (i.e., ≥56 years old, odds ratio=1), a lumbar spinal canal stenosis at L2-4 (odds ratio=2.5), and the presence of an intracanal protuberance with sharp margin in the site of the stenosis (odds ratio=7.2) were independent risk factors for the development of RNRs. A direct, significant correlation was found between the relative length of the RNRs and patients' age (Pearson r=0.36, p=0.001). The mean relative length of the RNRs was significantly higher in patients with RNRs located above the level of the stenosis than those with RNRs located below the site of the block. The degree of stenosis was associated with neither the presence nor the relative length of the RNRs.

CONCLUSIONS

With an occurrence rate of 15%, RNRs of the cauda equina are not uncommon in cases with lumbar spinal canal stenosis. Advanced age, a canal stenosis at L2-4, and the presence of a sharp intracanal protuberance in the site of the stenosis are the related risk factors. Patients' age and the location of RNRs may be of prognostic value.

MRI evaluation of lumbar spinal stenosis: is a rapid visual assessment as good as area measurement?

BACKGROUND

Lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) is commonly assessed on MRI by measuring dural sac cross-sectional area (DSCA). A new method, morphological grading A-D, has recently been introduced as an alternative method.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study is to compare these two different methods for assessing LSS on MRI and study their reliability and intercorrelation.

METHODS

On pretreatment MRI of 84 patients, two experienced radiologists independently classified level L2/L3, L3/L4 and L4/L5 as no, relative or significant stenosis using both methods. Agreement was analyzed by weighted Kappa. The correlation between the two methods was analysed using Spearman correlation, and visualized in a box plot.

RESULTS

The interobserver agreement (95 % CI) was 0.69 (0.61-0.77) and 0.65 (0.56-0.74), respectively. The intraobserver agreements for DSCA were 0.77 (0.60-0.74) and 0.80 (0.66-0.93). On morphological grading A-D it was 0.78 (0.65-0.92) and 0.81 (0.68-0.94). The correlation coefficient between the two methods was 0.85 (p < 0.001). Grades C and D were under the limit value for significant stenosis using the DSCA.

CONCLUSIONS

The study shows that the inter- and intraobserver agreements of DSCA and morphological grading A-D were acceptable and their intercorrelation is strong. Both methods may be used in the MRI evaluation of LSS.