• Spine J · Nov 2006

    Are first-time episodes of serious LBP associated with new MRI findings?

    • Eugene Carragee, Todd Alamin, Ivan Cheng, Thomas Franklin, Erica van den Haak, and Eric Hurwitz.
    • Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Stanford University School of Medicine, 300 Pasteur Drive, Rm. R-171, Stanford, CA 94305, USA. carragee@stanford.edu
    • Spine J. 2006 Nov 1;6(6):624-35.

    BackgroundMagnetic resonance (MR) imaging is frequently used to evaluate first-time episodes of serious low back pain (LBP). Common degenerative findings are often interpreted as recent developments and the probable anatomic cause of the new symptoms. To date no prospective study has established a baseline MR status of the lumbar spine in subjects without significant LBP problems and prospectively surveyed these subjects for acute changes shortly after new and serious LBP episodes. This method can identify new versus old MR findings possibly associated with the acute symptomatic episode.PurposeTo determine if new and serious episodes of LBP are associated with new and relevant findings on MRI.Study DesignProspective observational study with baseline and post-LBP MRI monitoring of 200 subjects over 5 years.Outcome MeasuresClinical outcomes: LBP intensity (visual analogue scale), Oswestry Disability Index, and work loss. MRI outcomes: disc degeneration, herniation, annular fissures, end plate changes, facet arthrosis, canal stenosis, spondylolisthesis, and root impingement.Methods200 subjects with a lifetime history of no significant LBP problems, and a high risk for new LBP episodes were studied at baseline with physical examination, plain radiographs, and MR imaging. Subjects were followed every 6 months for 5 years with a detailed telephone interview. Subjects with a new severe LBP episode (LBP>or=6/10,>1 week) were assessed for new diagnostic tests. New MR imaging, taken within 6 to 12 weeks of the start of a new LBP episode, was compared with baseline (asymptomatic) images. Two independent and blinded readers evaluated each baseline and follow-up study.ResultsDuring the 5-year observation period of 200 subjects, 51 (25%) subjects were evaluated with a lumbar MRI for clinically serious LBP episodes, and 3/51 (6%) had a primary radicular complaint. These 51 subjects had 67 MR scans. Of 51 subjects, 43 (84%) had either unchanged MR or showed regression of baseline changes. The most common progressive findings were disc signal loss (10%), progressive facet arthrosis (10%), or increased end plate changes (4%). Only two subjects, both with primary radicular complaints, had new findings of probable clinical significance (4%). Subjects having another MR were more likely to have had chronic pain at baseline (odds ratio [OR]=3.19; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.61-6.32), to smoke (OR=5.81; 95% CI 1.99-16.45), have baseline psychological distress (OR 2.27; 95% CI 1.15-4.49), and have previous disputed compensation claims (OR=2.35; 95% CI 0.97-5.69). Subjects involved in current compensation claims were also more likely to have an MR scan to evaluate the LBP episode (risk ratio=4.75, p<.001), but were unlikely to have significant new findings. New findings were not more frequent in subjects with LBP episodes developing after minor trauma than when LBP developed spontaneously.ConclusionFindings on MR imaging within 12 weeks of serious LBP inception are highly unlikely to represent any new structural change. Most new changes (loss of disc signal, facet arthrosis, and end plate signal changes) represent progressive age changes not associated with acute events. Primary radicular syndromes may have new root compression findings associated with root irritation.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…

What will the 'Medical Journal of You' look like?

Start your free 21 day trial now.

We guarantee your privacy. Your email address will not be shared.