Affiliation:
1. Hue University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Hue University
Abstract
Background: Lumbar spinal stenosis often associates with chronic pain described the abnormal narrowing of the lumbar spinal canal, resulting in compression of neural elements within the central spinal canal or the lateral recesses or the root canals or coordinate with each other. The purpose of this study was to describe and compare the plain X-ray and magnetic resonance imaging features of lumbar canal stenosis.
Materials and methods: This was a cross-sectional study of 78 patients with an acquired lumbar spinal canal between October 2017 and May 2018.
Results: The X-rays confirmed osteophytes in 92.3%, endplate sclerosis in 88.5% and disc space narrowing 62.8%. On MRI, 213 lumbar levels were lumbar spinal canal stenosis, 181 lumbar levels were evaluated for the grade of central spinal canal stenosis.
Conclusions: X-ray examination has limitations in a diagnosis of lumbar spinal stenosis but also serves as a diagnostic aid. MRI is well diagnosed as spinal pathology as well as lumbar spinal stenosis.
Key words: Lumbar spinal, Lumbar spinal stenosis, Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), X-ray, Grading
Publisher
Hue University of Medicine and Pharmacy
Reference10 articles.
1. Azimi P. et al. (2015), “Lumbar Spinal Canal Stenosis Classification Criteria: A New Tool”, Asian Spine Journal, 9 (3), pp.399-406.
2. Bartynski W.S. el al. (2003), “Lumbar root compression in the lateral recess: MR imaging, conventional myelography, and CT myelography comparison with surgical confirmation”, American Journal of Neuroradiology, 24 (3), pp.348-360.
3. Costello R.F. el al. (2007), “Nomenclature and Standard Reporting Terminology of Intervertebral Disk Herniation”, Magnetic Resonance Imaging Clinics, 15 (2), pp.167-174.
4. Genevay S., Atlas S.J. (2010), “Lumbar Spinal Stenosis”, Best practice & research. Clinical rheumatology, 24 (2), pp.253-265.
5. Lee G.Y. et al. (2011), “A new grading system of lumbar central canal stenosis on MRI: An easy and reliable method”, Skeletal Radiology, 40 (8), pp.1033-1039.