Skip to main content
Advertisement

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Publication Preview--Ahead of Print
    • Past Issue Archive
    • Case of the Week Archive
    • Classic Case Archive
    • Case of the Month Archive
  • For Authors
  • About Us
    • About AJNR
    • Editors
    • American Society of Neuroradiology
  • Submit a Manuscript
  • Podcasts
    • Subscribe on iTunes
    • Subscribe on Stitcher
  • More
    • Subscribers
    • Permissions
    • Advertisers
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
  • Other Publications
    • ajnr

User menu

  • Subscribe
  • Alerts
  • Log in

Search

  • Advanced search
American Journal of Neuroradiology
American Journal of Neuroradiology

American Journal of Neuroradiology

  • Subscribe
  • Alerts
  • Log in

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Publication Preview--Ahead of Print
    • Past Issue Archive
    • Case of the Week Archive
    • Classic Case Archive
    • Case of the Month Archive
  • For Authors
  • About Us
    • About AJNR
    • Editors
    • American Society of Neuroradiology
  • Submit a Manuscript
  • Podcasts
    • Subscribe on iTunes
    • Subscribe on Stitcher
  • More
    • Subscribers
    • Permissions
    • Advertisers
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
  • Follow AJNR on Twitter
  • Visit AJNR on Facebook
  • Follow AJNR on Instagram
  • Join AJNR on LinkedIn
  • RSS Feeds
Research ArticleSpine

Is Severe Pain Immediately after Spinal Augmentation a Predictor of Long-Term Outcomes?

Y.W. Cho, J.S. McDonald, A.E. Rad, J.J. Ocel and D.F. Kallmes
American Journal of Neuroradiology September 2013, 34 (9) 1853-1856; DOI: https://doi.org/10.3174/ajnr.A3505
Y.W. Cho
aFrom the Departments of Radiology (Y.W.C., J.S.M., A.E.R., J.J.O., D.F.K.)
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
J.S. McDonald
aFrom the Departments of Radiology (Y.W.C., J.S.M., A.E.R., J.J.O., D.F.K.)
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
A.E. Rad
aFrom the Departments of Radiology (Y.W.C., J.S.M., A.E.R., J.J.O., D.F.K.)
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
J.J. Ocel
aFrom the Departments of Radiology (Y.W.C., J.S.M., A.E.R., J.J.O., D.F.K.)
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
D.F. Kallmes
aFrom the Departments of Radiology (Y.W.C., J.S.M., A.E.R., J.J.O., D.F.K.)
bNeurosurgery (D.F.K.), Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • References
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Severe, immediate postprocedural pain and the need for analgesics after vertebroplasty can be a discouraging experience for patients and caregivers. The goal of this study was to investigate whether the presence of severe pain immediately after vertebroplasty predicts short- and long-term pain relief.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: A chart review was performed to categorize patients regarding pain severity and analgesic usage immediately after vertebroplasty (< 4 h). “Severe” pain was defined as at least 8 of 10 with the 10-point VAS. Outcomes were pain severity and pain medication score and usage at 1 month and 1 year after vertebroplasty. Outcomes and clinical characteristics were compared between groups by using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test and the Fisher exact test.

RESULTS: Of the 429 vertebroplasty procedures identified, 69 (16%) were associated with severe pain, and 133 (31%) were associated with analgesic administration immediately after the procedure. The group experiencing severe pain had higher preprocedure median VAS rest pain scores (5 [IQR, 2–7]) and activity pain scores (10 [IQR, 8–10]) compared with patients who did not experience severe pain (3 [IQR, 1–6]; P = .0208, and 8 [IQR, 7–10]; P = .0263, respectively). At 1 month postprocedure, VAS rest and activity pain scores were similar between the severe pain group and the nonsevere pain group (P = .16 and P = .25, respectively) and between the group receiving pain medication and the group not receiving pain medication (P = .25 and P = .67, respectively). This similarity continued for 1 year after the procedure. Analgesic usage was similar among all groups at 1 year postprocedure.

CONCLUSIONS: Patients with severe pain immediately after vertebroplasty have similar long-term outcomes compared with patients without severe pain.

ABBREVIATIONS:

IQR
interquartile range
VAS
visual analog scale

Spinal augmentation procedures, including vertebroplasty and kyphoplasty, have been used widely for palliation of pain-related osteoporotic and pathologic compression fractures of the spine. The literature abounds with both prospective and retrospective studies attempting to characterize many different aspects of the spinal augmentation procedures such as procedure efficacy, characteristics of fractures in success of augmentation, sequelae of spinal augmentation procedures, and a variety of other topics.1⇓⇓–4 However, there is a paucity of research investigating clinical signs or symptoms directly related to the procedure as predictors of outcome after spinal augmentation.

Severe, immediate postprocedural pain; pain before hospital discharge; and the need for analgesics after vertebroplasty can be a discouraging experience for patients and caregivers. Despite the literature establishing vertebroplasty as a technique for management of painful compression fractures, the short- and long-term outcomes in patients with severe, immediate postprocedural pain, to our knowledge, have not been investigated previously. The goal of our current study is to investigate whether the presence of severe pain immediately after spinal augmentation procedures or the need for immediate postprocedure analgesics predicts short- and long-term pain relief. In addition, our study will attempt to determine whether characteristics of the patient or the procedure can predict which patients will experience severe pain immediately after the procedure.

Materials and Methods

Study Population and Data Retrieval

Institutional review board approval was obtained before this retrospective study. A vertebroplasty patient data base maintained at our institution was the source of data for this study. Patients in this data base have previously been included in other published studies that have not specifically examined patients with immediate postprocedure severe pain.1,4⇓⇓⇓⇓⇓⇓⇓⇓⇓–14 Patients who underwent a vertebroplasty procedure at our institution from 2005–2011 were included in the study. Patients were excluded if they did not have immediate postprocedure pain data within 3 hours after the vertebroplasty or at either 1 month or 1 year postprocedure.

Retrospective medical chart review was performed to confirm data base records and retrieve additional clinical information. Data recorded included preprocedure descriptors (demographics; pain severity; prescribed analgesics; number, level, and acuity of each fracture; number of chronic fractures that were not treated because they were not amenable to vertebroplasty; and benign or malignant nature of the fracture), procedural descriptors (unilateral vs bilateral transpedicular approach, number of augmentations performed, distribution of cement, and complications), and postprocedural descriptors (pain severity and medications administered within 3 hours after the procedure and at 1-month and 1-year follow-ups). Pain severity was measured at both rest and activity by using the 10-point VAS.15 Medication scores were recorded as follows: 0 = no medications, 1 = over-the-counter analgesics, 2= non-narcotic prescription medication as needed, 3 = oral narcotic analgesic as needed, 4 = scheduled oral narcotic or analgesic patches, and 5 = intravenous narcotics.

Patients were categorized by pain and analgesic requirements within 3 hours of vertebroplasty. Patients were divided into 2 groups: those with immediate postprocedure pain scores ≥8 (“severe pain group”) and those whose pain scores were < 8 (“nonsevere pain group”) in the 3 hours after the vertebroplasty procedure. “Immediate postprocedure pain” was defined as that recorded before discharge from the hospital on the day of the procedure, typically 2–4 hours after vertebroplasty. Patients were also divided into whether they received pain medication in the 3 hours immediately after the procedure.

Statistical Analysis

We performed statistical analyses by using JMP (version 9; SAS Institute, Cary, North Carolina). Continuous variables were presented as median and IQR, and categoric variables were presented as percentages. Preprocedural, procedural, and postprocedural characteristics and outcomes were compared between groups by using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test and the Fisher exact test. Statistical significance was defined as P < .05.

Results

All vertebroplasty procedures performed from 2005–2011 by 8 independent operators were identified. Of 877 total procedures performed during this timeframe, 448 (51%) procedures were excluded because they lacked 3-hour postprocedure pain data or lacked either 1-month or 1-year follow-up information on pain and medication, leaving 429 included procedures. Of these 429 procedures, 69 (16%) were associated with severe pain in the 3 hours after the vertebroplasty procedure. A total of 133 (31%) of 429 procedures were associated with administration of some pain medications in the 3 hours after the vertebroplasty procedure.

Overall characteristics were very similar between the severe pain/pain medication groups and their respective control groups (Table 1). The severe pain group had significantly higher preprocedure median VAS rest pain scores (5 [IQR, 2–7]) compared with the nonsevere pain group (3 [IQR, 1–6]) (P = .0208). Median VAS activity pain scores were also significantly higher in the severe pain group (10 [IQR, 8–10]) compared with the nonsevere pain group (8 [IQR 7–10]) (P = .0263). The patient group that received pain medication immediately after the procedure also had higher median VAS activity pain scores (10 [IQR, 8–10]) compared with the group that did not receive pain medication (9 [(IQR, 7–10]) (P = .0022). There was a higher percentage of patients in the pain medication group with chronic fractures who were not treated because they were not amenable to vertebroplasty compared with the control group (59 [44%] of 133 vs 83 [28%] of 296; P = .0013). Patients in the pain medication group also had a shorter median duration of pain before the procedure compared with the control group (1 month [IQR 1–3] vs 2 months [IQR 1–4]; P = .0378). There was no difference in the percentage of patients who had 3 or more levels treated between the severe pain group and the nonsevere pain group (P = .21). However, there was a higher percentage of these patients in the pain medication group compared with the control group (22 [17%] of 133 vs 26 [9%] of 296; P = .0205). All other clinical and procedural characteristics were similar between the severe pain group and the nonsevere pain group and between the pain medication group and the no-pain-medication group.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 1:

Vertebroplasty patient and procedure characteristics

Rates of loss to follow-up were similar between the severe pain group and the nonsevere pain group and between the pain medication group and the no-pain-medication group at 1 month and 1 year after the procedure (Table 2). At 1 month postprocedure, VAS rest and activity pain scores were similar between the severe pain group and the nonsevere pain group (P = .16 and P = .25, respectively) and between the pain medication group and the no-pain-medication group (P = .25 and P = .67, respectively). However, a significantly higher percentage of patients had worsened medication scores (ie, from a score of 1 for over-the-counter narcotics to a score of 3 for prescription narcotics) in the severe pain group at 1 month compared with the nonsevere pain group (27 [45%] of 60 vs 90 [28%] of 323; P = .0097). At 1 year postprocedure, VAS rest and activity pain scores were similar between the severe pain group and the nonsevere pain group and between the pain medication group and the no-pain-medication group. Medication scores at 1 year were statistically similar between all groups, though the severe pain group still demonstrated a higher percentage of patients with worsened medication scores compared with the nonsevere pain group (11 [38%] of 29 vs 39 [27%] of 147; P = .26).

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 2:

Postvertebroplasty pain and medication usage at 1-month and 1-year follow-ups

Discussion

This study demonstrated that severe, postprocedure pain after spine augmentation did not predict greater pain severity at either 1 or 12 months after the procedure compared with patients not experiencing severe, postprocedure pain. This equivalence in pain outcomes was present, though the patients with severe, immediate postprocedure pain presented with greater baseline pain compared with the control group. We did observe that patients with severe pain were more likely to have a worsened medication score, indicating a need for stronger analgesics, at 1 month and 1 year postprocedure compared with patients who did not have severe pain. This finding may explain why patients with severe pain reported similar levels of pain at 1 month and 1 year postprocedure compared with patients without severe pain; however, we could not confirm if or how frequently patients were taking these analgesics. Taken together, these findings are highly relevant to spinal augmentation practitioners, as they can reassure patients that severe, postprocedure pain does not mean that their medium-term and long-term pain outcomes will be suboptimal.

In addition to providing prognostic clarity, our study can also be used to identify which factors, if any, will predict the occurrence of severe, immediate postprocedure pain. The only factor noted to correlate with such pain was the severity of baseline pain, but that parameter alone likely will not provide substantial guidance. Among the numerous factors that logically might predict immediate pain severity—including numbers of treated levels, unipedicular or bipedicular approaches, cement leakage, or chronic fractures that were untreated because they were not amenable to vertebroplasty—none correlated with severe, immediate pain. Patients who had 3 or more levels treated were more likely to receive pain medication immediately after the procedure compared with patients who had fewer levels treated; however, the incidence of reported severe pain was similar between these 2 groups.

Previous studies have evaluated the predictive value of early pain severity after spine augmentations. In a study of 181 vertebroplasty procedures, Hodler et al16 described that immediate postprocedural pain relief was the best predictor of midterm outcome of vertebroplasty. Weill et al17 showed that pain reduction achieved initially remained stable in 73% of their patients after 6 months. Heini et al18 also found stable results after 1 year. Our current study expands on this prior literature by offering larger patient cohorts and detailed analysis of potential factors that might influence long-term outcomes.

Our study had several limitations. First, a large number of patients were excluded from the study on the basis of incomplete records at 3 hours postprocedure or at 1 month or 1 year postprocedure. It is unclear how this may have affected the findings of the study. Second, although pain is the most common complaint and can be debilitating, the use of the subjective pain scoring (0–10) was likely a suboptimal evaluation tool of the effectiveness of vertebroplasty.19⇓⇓–22 In some cases in our study, pain at the puncture site continued for a few days after the procedure; therefore, VAS scores may have improved further if they had been evaluated later.20 Better functional assessment of patient response to vertebroplasty is likely necessary, as subjective assessment of pain scales is subject to substantial interobserver and intraobserver variability. Third, as with most studies on vertebroplasty, there was a potential for bias when patients are evaluated at follow-up. It is possible that the nurse or physician administering the follow-up questions could have influenced the responses of the patients. Furthermore, it is possible that responses to the follow-up questions were occasionally provided by family members or health care providers who interacted with the patients on a daily basis, particularly with cases in which the patient was unable to give responses because of disability or dementia.1 Fourth, although we could identify new prescriptions for analgesics after the procedure, we could not confirm if and how frequently patients were actually taking this medication. Finally, new fractures during the follow-up interval may have confounded pain outcomes. A number of patients who had immediate postprocedure relief had recurrent pain symptoms at the short- or long-term follow-up secondary to factors such as new metastatic lesions or development of new compression fractures.

Conclusions

Patients with severe pain after vertebroplasty have similar long-term outcomes and improvements compared with patients with no severe pain. Patient and procedural characteristics did not predispose patients to having immediate severe pain after vertebroplasty.

Footnotes

  • Disclosures: Jennifer McDonald—UNRELATED: Grants/Grants Pending: GE Healthcare. David Kallmes—UNRELATED: Consultancy: ev3,* Codman,* Medtronic;* Grants/Grants Pending: MicroVention,* Micrus,* ev3,* Benvenue,* Sequent;* Royalties: UVA Patent Foundation; Payment for Development of Educational Presentations: ev3,* CareFusion;* Travel/Accommodations/Meeting Expenses Unrelated to Activities Listed: MicroVention.* (*Money paid to institution.)

REFERENCES

  1. 1.↵
    1. Layton KF,
    2. Thielen KR,
    3. Koch CA,
    4. et al
    . Vertebroplasty, first 1000 levels of a single center: evaluation of the outcomes and complications. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2007;28:683–89
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  2. 2.↵
    1. Masala S,
    2. Mastrangeli R,
    3. Petrella MC,
    4. et al
    . Percutaneous vertebroplasty in 1,253 levels: results and long-term effectiveness in a single centre. Eur Radiol 2009;19:165–71
    CrossRefPubMed
  3. 3.↵
    1. McKiernan F,
    2. Faciszewski T,
    3. Jensen R
    . Quality of life following vertebroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2004;86-A:2600–06
  4. 4.↵
    1. Rad AE,
    2. Kallmes DF
    . Pain relief following vertebroplasty in patients with and without localizing tenderness on palpation. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2008;29:1622–26
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  5. 5.↵
    1. Rad AE,
    2. Kallmes DF
    . Correlation between preoperative pain duration and percutaneous vertebroplasty outcome. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2011;32:1842–45
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  6. 6.↵
    1. Rad AE,
    2. Gray LA,
    3. Sinaki M,
    4. et al
    . Role of physical activity in new onset fractures after percutaneous vertebroplasty. Acta Radiol 2011;52:1020–23
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  7. 7.↵
    1. Miller FG,
    2. Kallmes DF,
    3. Buchbinder R
    . Vertebroplasty and the placebo response. Radiology 2011;259:621–25
    CrossRefPubMed
  8. 8.↵
    1. McDonald RJ,
    2. Gray LA,
    3. Cloft HJ,
    4. et al
    . The effect of operator variability and experience in vertebroplasty outcomes. Radiology 2009;253:478–85
    CrossRefPubMed
  9. 9.↵
    1. McDonald RJ,
    2. Achenbach SJ,
    3. Atkinson EJ,
    4. et al
    . Mortality in the vertebroplasty population. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2011;32:1818–23
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  10. 10.↵
    1. Leake CB,
    2. Brinjikji W,
    3. Cloft HJ,
    4. et al
    . Trends of inpatient spine augmentation: 2001–08. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2011;32:1464–68
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  11. 11.↵
    1. Knavel EM,
    2. Rad AE,
    3. Thielen KR,
    4. et al
    . Clinical outcomes with hemivertebral filling during percutaneous vertebroplasty. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2009;30:496–99
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  12. 12.↵
    1. Khosla A,
    2. Diehn FE,
    3. Rad AE,
    4. et al
    . Neither subendplate cement deposition nor cement leakage into the disk space during vertebroplasty significantly affects patient outcomes. Radiology 2012;264:180–86
    CrossRefPubMed
  13. 13.↵
    1. Harvey RE,
    2. Kallmes DF
    . Discharge disposition following vertebroplasty. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2011;32:1614–16
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  14. 14.↵
    1. Ehteshami Rad A,
    2. Luetmer MT,
    3. Murad MH,
    4. et al
    . The association between the duration of preoperative pain and pain improvement in vertebral augmentation: a meta-analysis. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2012;33:376–81
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  15. 15.↵
    1. Dworkin RH,
    2. Turk DC,
    3. Farrar JT,
    4. et al
    . Core outcome measures for chronic pain clinical trials: IMMPACT recommendations. Pain 2005;113:9–19
    CrossRefPubMed
  16. 16.↵
    1. Hodler J,
    2. Peck D,
    3. Gilula LA
    . Midterm outcome after vertebroplasty: predictive value of technical and patient-related factors. Radiology 2003;227:662–68
    PubMed
  17. 17.↵
    1. Weill A,
    2. Chiras J,
    3. Simon JM,
    4. et al
    . Spinal metastases: indications for and results of percutaneous injection of acrylic surgical cement. Radiology 1996;199:241–47
    PubMed
  18. 18.↵
    1. Heini PF,
    2. Walchli B,
    3. Berlemann U
    . Percutaneous transpedicular vertebroplasty with PMMA: operative technique and early results. A prospective study for the treatment of osteoporotic compression fractures. Eur Spine J 2000;9:445–50
    CrossRefPubMed
  19. 19.↵
    1. McGraw JK,
    2. Cardella J,
    3. Barr JD,
    4. et al
    . Society of Interventional Radiology quality improvement guidelines for percutaneous vertebroplasty. J Vasc Interv Radiol 2003;14:S311–15
    PubMed
  20. 20.↵
    1. Kobayashi K,
    2. Shimoyama K,
    3. Nakamura K,
    4. et al
    . Percutaneous vertebroplasty immediately relieves pain of osteoporotic vertebral compression fractures and prevents prolonged immobilization of patients. Eur Radiol 2005;15:360–67
    CrossRefPubMed
  21. 21.↵
    1. Grados F,
    2. Depriester C,
    3. Cayrolle G,
    4. et al
    . Long-term observations of vertebral osteoporotic fractures treated by percutaneous vertebroplasty. Rheumatology (Oxford) 2000;39:1410–14
    Abstract/FREE Full Text
  22. 22.↵
    1. Alvarez L,
    2. Perez-Higueras A,
    3. Quinones D,
    4. et al
    . Vertebroplasty in the treatment of vertebral tumors: postprocedural outcome and quality of life. Eur Spine J 2003;12:356–60
    CrossRefPubMed
  • Received September 24, 2012.
  • Accepted after revision December 5, 2012.
  • © 2013 by American Journal of Neuroradiology
View Abstract
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

American Journal of Neuroradiology: 34 (9)
American Journal of Neuroradiology
Vol. 34, Issue 9
1 Sep 2013
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
  • Complete Issue (PDF)
Advertisement
Print
Download PDF
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on American Journal of Neuroradiology.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Is Severe Pain Immediately after Spinal Augmentation a Predictor of Long-Term Outcomes?
(Your Name) has sent you a message from American Journal of Neuroradiology
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the American Journal of Neuroradiology web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Is Severe Pain Immediately after Spinal Augmentation a Predictor of Long-Term Outcomes?
Y.W. Cho, J.S. McDonald, A.E. Rad, J.J. Ocel, D.F. Kallmes
American Journal of Neuroradiology Sep 2013, 34 (9) 1853-1856; DOI: 10.3174/ajnr.A3505

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
Is Severe Pain Immediately after Spinal Augmentation a Predictor of Long-Term Outcomes?
Y.W. Cho, J.S. McDonald, A.E. Rad, J.J. Ocel, D.F. Kallmes
American Journal of Neuroradiology Sep 2013, 34 (9) 1853-1856; DOI: 10.3174/ajnr.A3505
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One
Purchase

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • ABBREVIATIONS:
    • Materials and Methods
    • Results
    • Discussion
    • Conclusions
    • Footnotes
    • REFERENCES
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • References
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • No related articles found.
  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • No citing articles found.
  • Crossref
  • Google Scholar

This article has not yet been cited by articles in journals that are participating in Crossref Cited-by Linking.

More in this TOC Section

  • Percutaneous Sacroplasty with or without Radiofrequency Ablation for Treatment of Painful Sacral Metastases
  • Spontaneous Spinal CSF Leaks Stratified by Age, Body Mass Index, and Spinal Level
  • Surgical Ligation of Spinal CSF-Venous Fistulas after Transvenous Embolization in Patients with Spontaneous Intracranial Hypotension
Show more Spine

Similar Articles

Advertisement

News and Updates

  • Lucien Levy Best Research Article Award
  • Thanks to our 2021 Distinguished Reviewers
  • Press Releases

Resources

  • Evidence-Based Medicine Level Guide
  • How to Participate in a Tweet Chat
  • AJNR Podcast Archive
  • Ideas for Publicizing Your Research
  • Librarian Resources
  • Terms and Conditions

Opportunities

  • Share Your Art in Perspectives
  • Get Peer Review Credit from Publons
  • Moderate a Tweet Chat

American Society of Neuroradiology

  • Neurographics
  • ASNR Annual Meeting
  • Fellowship Portal
  • Position Statements

© 2022 by the American Society of Neuroradiology | Print ISSN: 0195-6108 Online ISSN: 1936-959X

Powered by HighWire