A CONTROLLED COMPARISON OF MYELOGRAPHY, COMPUTED-TOMOGRAPHY, AND MAGNETIC-RESONANCE-IMAGING IN CLINICALLY SUSPECTED LUMBAR DISC HERNIATION

被引：30

作者：

ALBECK, MJ ^{[1
]}

HILDEN, J ^{[1
]}

KJAER, L ^{[1
]}

HOLTAS, S ^{[1
]}

PRAESTHOLM, J ^{[1
]}

HENRIKSEN, O ^{[1
]}

GJERRIS, F ^{[1
]}

机构：

[1] UNIV COPENHAGEN,RIGSHOSP,NEUROSURG CLIN,DK-2100 COPENHAGEN,DENMARK

来源：

SPINE | 1995年 / 20卷 / 04期

关键词：

INTERVERTEBRAL DISC DISPLACEMENT; RECEIVER OPERATING CHARACTERISTIC (ROC) CURVES; MYELOGRAPHY; COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY; MAGNETIC RESONANCE IMAGING;

D O I：

10.1097/00007632-199502001-00006

中图分类号：

R74 [神经病学与精神病学];

学科分类号：

摘要：

Study design. A controlled prospective blinded study. Objectives. To compare the diagnostic power of myelography, computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging in the diagnosis of low lumbar disc herniation. Methods. Eighty patients with monoradicular sciatica were examined by myelography, computed tomography, and magnetic resonance imaging, and all underwent subsequent surgery. The images were evaluated twice in a blinded fashion, and the diagnostic power of the modalities was expressed by a decision-analytic regret function. Results. In 57 patients (71%) a disc herniation at the expected level was disclosed at surgery. The largest amount of diagnostic information was gained from computed tomography, followed by magnetic resonance imaging and myelography. Both computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging were significantly informative, whereas this was not the case for myelography. Conclusion. The results indicate that computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging should be the first choice for imaging in patients with suspected lumbar disc herniation.

引用

页码：443 / 448

页数：6

共 35 条

[1]

Albeck M.J., Madsen F.F., Wagner A., Gjerris F., Fractures of the lumbar vertebral ring apophysis imitating disc herniation, Acta Neurochir, 113, pp. 52-56, (1991)

[2]

Bates D., Ruggieri P., Imaging modalities for evaluation of the spine, Radiol Clin North Am, 29, pp. 675-690, (1991)

[3]

Beam C.A., Sostman H.D., Zheng J.-Y., Status of clinical MR evaluations 1985-1988, Baseline and Design for Further Assessments. Radiology, 180, pp. 265-270, (1991)

[4]

Begg C.B., McNeil BJ. Assessment of radiologic tests: Control of bias and other design considerations, Radiology, 167, pp. 565-569, (1988)

[5]

Bell G.R., Rothman R.H., Booth R.E., Et al., A study of computer-assisted tomography II. Comparison of metrizamide myelography and computed tomography in the diagnosis of herniated lumbar disc and spinal stenosis, Spine, 9, pp. 552-556, (1984)

[6]

Chafetz N.I., Genant H.K., Moon K.L., Helms C.A., Morris J.M., Recognition of lumbar disk herniation with NMR, AJR, 141, pp. 1153-1156, (1983)

[7]

Cooper L.S., Chalmers T.C., McCally M., Berrier J., Sacks H.S., The poor quality of early evaluations of magnetic resonance imaging, JAMA, 22, pp. 3277-3280, (1988)

[8]

Drayer B.P., Williams K.D., Bird C.R., Fram E., Keller P., Magnetic resonance imaging of the lumbosacral spine, BNI Quarterly, 5, pp. 24-38, (1989)

[9]

Eldevik O.P., Dugstad G., Orrison W.W., Haughton V.M., The effect of clinical bias on the interpretation of myelography and spinal computed tomography, Radiology, 145, pp. 85-89, (1982)

[10]

Espersen J.O., Kosteljanetz M., Halaburt H., Miletic T., Predictive value of radiculography in patients with lumbago- sciatica. A prospective study (Part II), Acta Neurochir, 73, pp. 213-221, (1984)

← 1 2 3 4 →