Assessment of Magnetic Resonance Imaging in the Diagnosis of Lumbar Spine Foraminal Stenosis—A Surgeon's Perspective

Study Design A 2-part cadaveric study. Objectives Part 1: To assess the reliability of a semiquantitative classification system for grading lumbar spine foraminal stenosis and the variability in magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) examinations carried out in different institutions. Part 2: to assess the difference between the foraminal measurements carried out on MRI images and on cadaveric specimens. Summary of Background Data There are limited data to suggest that MRI examinations are sensitive or specific for the diagnosis of lumbar spine foraminal stenosis. The effect of the variability in techniques, used by different imaging centers, is not well understood. Methods Three fresh, frozen human lumbar spines were examined with 3 different clinical MRI systems. Eight spine surgeons used the MRI images to grade the foramina, on the basis of a previously suggested semiquantitative classification. In addition, the dimensions of all foramina were measured using software available on each of the MRI systems. The dimensions of the specimens' foramina were then measured in situ, graded, and compared with the MRI measurements. Results and Conclusions There was poor intraobserver agreement using the semiquantitative grading system. The parameters associated with the grade of stenosis assigned to the foramen were as follows: (1) the observer doing the grading, (2) the place it was imaged, and (3) the location of the foramen. There was poor correlation between measurements of the foramina carried out on MRI and the specimens.

[1]  A Benini,et al.  Lumbar spine: quantitative and qualitative assessment of positional (upright flexion and extension) MR imaging and myelography. , 1998, Radiology.

[2]  J. R. Landis,et al.  The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. , 1977, Biometrics.

[3]  T. Mittlmeier,et al.  Screw placement in transoral atlantoaxial plate systems: an anatomical study. , 2001, Journal of neurosurgery.

[4]  R. Pietrobon,et al.  Observer Variability in Assessing Lumbar Spinal Stenosis Severity on Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Its Relation to Cross-Sectional Spinal Canal Area , 2002, Spine.

[5]  H. An,et al.  Spine update. Lumbar foraminal stenosis. , 2000, Spine.

[6]  D. Bidgood,et al.  Quantitative measurements of the spinal cord and canal by MR imaging and myelography , 1998, European Radiology.

[7]  D B Hackney,et al.  Pseudoatrophy of the cervical portion of the spinal cord on MR images: a manifestation of the truncation artifact? , 1990, AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology.

[8]  M. Ebersold The Adult Spine: Principles and Practice , 1993 .

[9]  A. P. Carter,et al.  Interobserver discrepancies in distance measurements from lumbar spine CT scans. , 1984, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[10]  C. K. Lee,et al.  Lateral Lumbar Spinal Canal Stenosis: Classification, Pathologic Anatomy and Surgical Decompression , 1988, Spine.

[11]  J. Evans,et al.  Lumbar Intervertebral Foramens: An in Vitro Study of Their Shape in Relation to Intervertebral Disc Pathology , 1991, Spine.

[12]  L. Sider Radiographic manifestations of primary bronchogenic carcinoma. , 1990, Radiologic clinics of North America.

[13]  B H Nowicki,et al.  Lumbar foraminal stenosis: critical heights of the intervertebral discs and foramina. A cryomicrotome study in cadavera. , 1995, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[14]  R. Buxton,et al.  Quantitation of structural distortion of the cervical neural foramina in gradient‐echo MR imaging , 1991, Journal of magnetic resonance imaging : JMRI.

[15]  V. Haughton,et al.  Neural foraminal ligaments of the lumbar spine: appearance at CT and MR imaging. , 1992, Radiology.