Advanced

AJNR - American Journal of Neuroradiology

This Article Figures Only Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via CrossRef Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Bartynski, W. S. Articles by Lin, L. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Bartynski, W. S. Articles by Lin, L.

American Journal of Neuroradiology 24:348-360, March 2003
© 2003 American Society of Neuroradiology

SPINE

Lumbar Root Compression in the Lateral Recess: MR Imaging, Conventional Myelography, and CT Myelography Comparison with Surgical Confirmation

Walter S. Bartynski^a and Luke Lin^a

^a From the Department of Radiology, The Western Pennsylvania Hospital, Pittsburgh, PA

Address reprint requests to Walter S. Bartynski, MD, Department of Radiology, Division of Neuroradiology, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Presbyterian University Hospital, 200 Lothrop Street, D132, Pittsburgh, PA 15213

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Previous authors have shown that conventional myelography is superior to plain CT in the assessment of root compression in the lateral recess, but this question has never been evaluated with respect to MR imaging of the lumbar level. Our purpose was to assess the accuracy of MR imaging, conventional myelography, and postmyelography CT (CT myelography) of the lumbar level in identifying degenerative lateral recess root compression with surgical confirmation.

METHODS: MR imaging, conventional myelography, and CT myelography of the lumbar level were assessed in the imaging of 58 lateral recesses at 38 lumbar levels in 26 patients who underwent surgery for radiculopathy with degenerative lateral recess abnormality. Each lateral recess was graded as normal, small without root compression, small with root compression, or severe root compression.

RESULTS: MR imaging underestimated root compression in 28% to 29% of the cases in which root impingement was surgically confirmed. Conventional myelography underestimated root compression in only 5% to 7% of the cases and correctly predicted impingement in 93% to 95%. CT myelography underestimated root compression in 38% of the surgically confirmed cases.

CONCLUSION: MR imaging significantly underestimated root compression caused by degenerative changes in the lateral recess. Although MR imaging is a superb study when used in the search for degenerative disk disease and disk protrusion, conventional myelography is a crucial supplemental study that is necessary to confirm degenerative root impingement in the lateral recess as the cause of radiculopathy.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				J.-H. Buhk, E. Elolf, D. Jacob, H.-H. Rustenbeck, A. Mohr, and M. Knauth A Comparison of Angiographic CT and Multisection CT in Lumbar Myelographic Imaging AJNR Am. J. Neuroradiol., March 1, 2008; 29(3): 442 - 446. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J C van Rijn, N Klemetso, J B Reitsma, P M Bossuyt, F J Hulsmans, W C Peul, G J den Heeten, J Stam, and C B L M Majoie Observer variation in the evaluation of lumbar herniated discs and root compression: spiral CT compared with MRI Br. J. Radiol., May 1, 2006; 79(941): 372 - 377. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]