Is multidetector computed tomography comparable to magnetic resonance imaging for assessment of lumbar foraminal stenosis?

Background Both multidetector computed tomography (MDCT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) are used for assessment of lumbar foraminal stenosis (LFS). Therefore, it is relevant to assess agreement between these imaging modalities. Purpose To determine intermodality, inter-, and intra-observer agreement for assessment of LFS on MDCT and MRI. Material and Methods A total of 120 foramina in 20 patients who visited our institution in January and February 2014 were evaluated by six radiologists with different levels of experience. Radiologists evaluated presence and severity of LFS on sagittal CT and MR images according to a previously published LFS grading system. Intermodality agreement was analyzed by using weighted kappa statistics, while inter- and intra-observer agreement were analyzed by using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) and kappa statistics. Results Overall intermodality agreement was moderate to good (kappa, 0.478–0.765). In particular, two professors and one fellow tended to overestimate the degree of LFS on CT compared with MRI. For inter-observer agreement of all six observers, ICCs indicated excellent agreement for both CT (0.774) and MRI (0.771), while Fleiss’ kappa values showed moderate agreement for CT (0.482) and MRI (0.575). There was better agreement between professors and fellows compared with residents. For intra-observer agreement, ICCs indicated excellent agreement, while kappa values showed good to excellent agreement for both CT and MRI. Conclusion MDCT was comparable to MRI for diagnosis and assessment of LFS, especially for experienced observers. However, there was a tendency to overestimate the degree of LFS on MDCT compared with MRI.

[1]  J. Zamora,et al.  Agreement in the assessment of metastatic spine disease using scoring systems. , 2015, Radiotherapy and oncology : journal of the European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology.

[2]  Tetsuro Ohba,et al.  Characterization of symptomatic lumbar foraminal stenosis by conventional imaging , 2015, European Spine Journal.

[3]  Tomoyuki Saito,et al.  Roentgenographic and computed tomographic findings in symptomatic lumbar foraminal stenosis , 2015, European Spine Journal.

[4]  Gustav Andreisek,et al.  Consensus conference on core radiological parameters to describe lumbar stenosis - an initiative for structured reporting , 2014, European Radiology.

[5]  A. Fujikawa,et al.  Three-dimensional fast imaging employing steady-state acquisition MRI and its diagnostic value for lumbar foraminal stenosis , 2014, European Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery & Traumatology.

[6]  H.-J. Park,et al.  Clinical Correlation of a New MR Imaging Method for Assessing Lumbar Foraminal Stenosis , 2012, American Journal of Neuroradiology.

[7]  J. Hodler,et al.  Uncertainties in the diagnosis of lumbar spinal stenosis. , 2011, Radiology.

[8]  A. Miyauchi,et al.  Comparison Between MRI and Myelography in Lumbar Spinal Canal Stenosis for the Decision of Levels of Decompression Surgery , 2011, Journal of spinal disorders & techniques.

[9]  Heung Sik Kang,et al.  A practical MRI grading system for lumbar foraminal stenosis. , 2010, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[10]  James N Weinstein,et al.  Reliability of Readings of Magnetic Resonance Imaging Features of Lumbar Spinal Stenosis , 2008, Spine.

[11]  John A. Hipp,et al.  Assessment of Magnetic Resonance Imaging in the Diagnosis of Lumbar Spine Foraminal Stenosis—A Surgeon's Perspective , 2006, Journal of spinal disorders & techniques.

[12]  M. Bhandari,et al.  Reliability in grading the severity of lumbar spinal stenosis. , 2000, Journal of spinal disorders.

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

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

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

[16]  M. Ferrando Causes of failure of surgery on the lumbar spine. , 2015 .

[17]  S. Ragot,et al.  Reliability and validity of a new measurement of lumbar foraminal volume using a computed tomography , 2014, Surgical and Radiologic Anatomy.

[18]  J. Wilmink Imaging Techniques for the Lumbar Spine: Conventional Radiology, Computed Tomography; Magnetic Resonance Imaging , 2010 .

[19]  Jeffrey G Jarvik,et al.  Moderate versus mediocre: the reliability of spine MR data interpretations. , 2009, Radiology.

[20]  James N Weinstein,et al.  Lumbar spine: reliability of MR imaging findings. , 2009, Radiology.

[21]  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.