Diagnostic Characteristics of Neuroradiological Tests in Lumbar Disc Herniation
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5457/ams.v40i1.104Keywords:
lumbar disc herniation, discectomy, outcome, magnetic resonance, computed tomographyAbstract
Background: Many apparent advantages of the magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in establishing diagnosis of lumbar disc herniation are counter parted by its relatively high cost and sparse availability in developing countries. Thus, a significant portion of patients are still subjected to lumbar disc surgery based solely on computed tomography (CT) findings. Aim: The aim of this study was to compare diagnostic characteristics of afore mentioned radiological tests (CT and MRI) and to investigate if the choice of diagnostic test influences outcome of discectomy. Methods: Basic demographic, clinical and radiological variables were evaluated in a group of 70 patients operated on for disc herniation of whom 30 were operated based on MRI findings and the remainder were operated based on CT scan alone. Outcome was assessed using Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) and Roland-Morris (RM) scale 6 months postoperatively and correlated to the type of neuroradiological examination. Basic diagnostic characteristic of the two diagnostic modalities (MR and CT) were compared. Results: The type of radiological investigation was shown to be statistically poor predictor of outcome after microdiscectomy. Even though MR scan was more sensitive in detecting disc extrusion than CT (sensitivity of 100% versus 65%, respectively), the presence of preoperative MR scan did not influence the outcome. Conclusion: We conclude that although the presence of preoperative MR scan does not influence outcome, higher sensitivity and specificity in detecting disc extrusions and superior ability to detect nerve root compression warrant an introduction of MR scan prior to any disc surgery.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright transfer
The listed authors warrant that they are the authors and sole owners of the submitted manuscript. The authors also warrant that the work is original; that it has not been previously published in print or electronic format and is not under consideration by another publisher or electronic medium; that it has not been previously transferred, assigned, or otherwise encumbered; and that the authors have full power to grant such rights. With respect to the results of this work, the manuscript of this or substantially similar content will not be submitted to any other journal until the review process in the Acta Medica Salinianana has been officially completed (acceptance or rejection of the manuscript). The paper will not be withdrawn from the review process by the Acta Medica Saliniana Editorial Board until the review process is completed. The authors will comply with the requests of the Acta Medica Saliniana Editors and reviewers to improve the paper for publication. The eventual disagreements will be submitted in a written form; the authors are aware that the disagreement(s) with the Acta Medica Saliniana requests may result in the rejection of the manuscript. The authors hereby grant to the Acta Medica Saliniana the right to edit, revise, abridge, and condense the manuscript. If the manuscript is accepted for publication in the Acta Medica Saliniana, the authors hereby transfer the copyright of the paper to the Acta Medica Saliniana. The authors permit the Acta Medica Saliniana to allow third parties to copy any part of the journal without asking for permission, provided that the reference to the source is given. For papers with more than one author: All other co-authors agree to allow the corresponding author to make decisions regarding prepublication release of the information in the paper to the media, federal agencies, or both.
