0
Scientific Articles   |    
Electromyographic and Magnetic Resonance Imaging to Predict Lumbar Stenosis, Low-Back Pain, and No Back Symptoms
Andrew J. Haig, MD1; Michael E. Geisser, PhD1; Henry C. Tong, MD, MS1; Karen S.J. Yamakawa, MS1; Douglas J. Quint, MD1; Julian T. Hoff, MD1; Anthony Chiodo, MD1; Jennifer A. Miner, MBA1; Vaishali V. Phalke, MD1
1 Departments of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation (A.J.H., M.E.G., H.C.T., K.S.J.Y., A.C., and J.A.M.), Neurosurgery (J.T.H.), Radiology (D.J.Q. and V.V.P.), and Orthopedic Surgery (A.J.H.), University of Michigan, 325 East Eisenhower Parkway, Ann Arbor, MI 48108. E-mail address for A.J. Haig: andyhaig@umich.edu
The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery.  2007; 89:358-366  doi:10.2106/JBJS.E.00704
5 Recommendations (Recommend) | 3 Comments | Saved by 3 Users Save Case

Abstract

Background: Magnetic resonance imaging is commonly used to diagnose lumbar spinal stenosis. Some persons without symptoms have a small lumbar spinal canal. Electrodiagnosis has been used to diagnose spinal stenosis for over sixty years, but we are aware of no masked, controlled trials of the use of electrodiagnosis for that purpose. This study was performed to evaluate the relationships of magnetic resonance imaging measures and electrodiagnostic data with the clinical syndrome of spinal stenosis.

Methods: One hundred and fifty persons between the ages of fifty-five and eighty years old, including asymptomatic volunteers and persons referred for lumbar magnetic resonance imaging, underwent clinical examination, electrodiagnosis, and magnetic resonance imaging. Subjects were excluded if they had neuromuscular disease, sacral cancer, or inadequate test results, which left 126 subjects for the final analysis. The final cohort was divided into three groups—no back pain, mechanical back pain, and clinical spinal stenosis—on the basis of the impression of the examining physician, for whom the results of the magnetic resonance imaging and electrodiagnostic testing were masked. A spine surgeon also reviewed both the imaging and clinical examination data.

Results: The examining physician's diagnosis of clinical spinal stenosis was significantly related to the neurological findings on examination (p < 0.05) and to the spine surgeon's diagnosis (p < 0.001). The diagnosis of clinical spinal stenosis was also significantly related to the presence of fibrillations on electrodiagnostic testing (p = 0.003), the minimum anteroposterior diameter of the spinal canal on the magnetic resonance images (p = 0.016), and the average of the two smallest spinal canal diameters (p = 0.008) on the images. Measurements on magnetic resonance imaging did not differentiate subjects with clinical spinal stenosis from controls better than chance, whereas paraspinal mapping electrodiagnosis scores did.

Conclusions: This prospective, controlled, masked study of electrodiagnosis and magnetic resonance imaging for older subjects showed that imaging does not differentiate symptomatic from asymptomatic persons, whereas electrodiagnosis does. We believe that radiographic findings alone are insufficient to justify treatment for spinal stenosis.

Level of Evidence: Diagnostic Level IV. See Instructions to Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Figures in this Article
    Sign In to Your Personal ProfileSign In To Access Full Content
    Not a Subscriber?
    Get online access for 30 days for $30
    New to JBJS?
    Sign up for a full subscription to both the print and online editions
    Register for a FREE limited account to get full access to all CME activities, to comment on public articles, or to sign up for alerts.
    Register for a FREE limited account to get full access to all CME activities
    Have a subscription to the print edition?
    Current subscribers to The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery in either the print or quarterly DVD formats receive free online access to JBJS.org.
    Forgot your password?
    Enter your username and email address. We'll send you a reminder to the email address on record.

     
    Forgot your username or need assistance? Please contact customer service at subs@jbjs.org. If your access is provided
    by your institution, please contact you librarian or administrator for username and password information. Institutional
    administrators, to reset your institution's master username or password, please contact subs@jbjs.org
    Accreditation Statement
    These activities have been planned and implemented in accordance with the Essential Areas and policies of the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education (ACCME) through the joint sponsorship of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons and The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, Inc. The American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons is accredited by the ACCME to provide continuing medical education for physicians.
    CME Activities Associated with This Article
    Submit a Comment
    Please read the other comments before you post yours. Contributors must reveal any conflict of interest.
    Comments are moderated and will appear on the site at the discretion of JBJS editorial staff.

    * = Required Field
    (if multiple authors, separate names by comma)
    Example: John Doe




    Related Articles
    Related Cases
    Related Content
    Topic Collections
    Related Audio and Videos
    PubMed Articles
    Quantification of walking ability in subjects with neurogenic claudication from lumbar spinal stenosis-a comparative study.
    The spine journal : official journal of the North American Spine Society: Issue date- 2011 Dec 29
    Which Radiographic Parameters Are Linked to Failure of a Dynamic Spinal Implant?
    Clinical orthopaedics and related research: Issue date- 2011 Nov 29
    Clinical Trials
    Readers of This Also Read...
    jbjs jobs
    12/22/2011
    VA - Charleston Area Medical Center
    12/22/2011
    ME - Central Maine Medical Center
    12/22/2011
    Virginia - Charleston Area Medical Center