The 3-kilogram weight-lifting flexion radiograph: a new diagnostic method for segmental sagittal lumbar instability: a cross-sectional study.

IF 2.3 Q2 ORTHOPEDICS
Koopong Siribumrungwong, Warunyoo Suttikadsanee, Waroot Pholsawatchai, Sorrawich Singhatanadgige, Thongchai Suntharapa
{"title":"The 3-kilogram weight-lifting flexion radiograph: a new diagnostic method for segmental sagittal lumbar instability: a cross-sectional study.","authors":"Koopong Siribumrungwong, Warunyoo Suttikadsanee, Waroot Pholsawatchai, Sorrawich Singhatanadgige, Thongchai Suntharapa","doi":"10.31616/asj.2025.0065","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Study design: </strong>A cross-sectional study.</p><p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To evaluate the diagnostic performance of a novel 3-kg weight-lifting flexion radiograph for detecting lumbar instability.</p><p><strong>Overview of literature: </strong>Conventional flexion-extension radiographs have limited sensitivity for detecting lumbar instability, while magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is a reliable standard. This study compares the performance of a novel weight-lifting radiograph to conventional flexion radiographs, using MRI as the reference standard.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Forty-six patients with a diagnosis of lumbar instability were enrolled. Participants underwent lateral flexion, lateral extension, and 3-kg weight-lifting flexion lumbosacral spine radiographs. MRI was also performed on all participants. Diagnostic parameters, including sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, accuracy, and likelihood ratios, were calculated for each lumbar level. Reliability was assessed using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The 3-kg weight-lifting flexion radiograph showed higher sensitivity for detecting spinal instability at the L3/4 and L4/5 levels (88% vs. 36% and 83.3% vs. 44.44%, respectively) but lower specificity (61.9% vs. 76.19% and 70% vs. 80%, respectively) compared to the conventional flexion radiograph. McNemar tests revealed no significant differences between the 3-kg weight-lifting flexion radiograph and MRI at these levels (p >0.05). Reliability assessments demonstrated excellent intra- and interobserver agreement (ICC ≥0.99). Furthermore, this technique was safe, with no adverse effects reported.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The 3-kg weight-lifting flexion radiograph enhances diagnostic sensitivity and accuracy for lumbar instability, particularly at the L3/4 and L4/5 levels, offering a reliable screening alternative.</p>","PeriodicalId":8555,"journal":{"name":"Asian Spine Journal","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Asian Spine Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31616/asj.2025.0065","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Study design: A cross-sectional study.

Purpose: To evaluate the diagnostic performance of a novel 3-kg weight-lifting flexion radiograph for detecting lumbar instability.

Overview of literature: Conventional flexion-extension radiographs have limited sensitivity for detecting lumbar instability, while magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is a reliable standard. This study compares the performance of a novel weight-lifting radiograph to conventional flexion radiographs, using MRI as the reference standard.

Methods: Forty-six patients with a diagnosis of lumbar instability were enrolled. Participants underwent lateral flexion, lateral extension, and 3-kg weight-lifting flexion lumbosacral spine radiographs. MRI was also performed on all participants. Diagnostic parameters, including sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, accuracy, and likelihood ratios, were calculated for each lumbar level. Reliability was assessed using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs).

Results: The 3-kg weight-lifting flexion radiograph showed higher sensitivity for detecting spinal instability at the L3/4 and L4/5 levels (88% vs. 36% and 83.3% vs. 44.44%, respectively) but lower specificity (61.9% vs. 76.19% and 70% vs. 80%, respectively) compared to the conventional flexion radiograph. McNemar tests revealed no significant differences between the 3-kg weight-lifting flexion radiograph and MRI at these levels (p >0.05). Reliability assessments demonstrated excellent intra- and interobserver agreement (ICC ≥0.99). Furthermore, this technique was safe, with no adverse effects reported.

Conclusions: The 3-kg weight-lifting flexion radiograph enhances diagnostic sensitivity and accuracy for lumbar instability, particularly at the L3/4 and L4/5 levels, offering a reliable screening alternative.

3公斤举重屈曲x线片:一种诊断节段性矢状腰椎不稳的新方法:横断面研究。
研究设计:横断面研究。目的:评价一种新型的3公斤举重屈曲x线片对腰椎不稳定的诊断性能。文献综述:传统的屈伸x线片对腰椎不稳定的检测灵敏度有限,而磁共振成像(MRI)是一个可靠的标准。本研究使用MRI作为参考标准,比较了一种新型举重x线片与传统屈曲x线片的表现。方法:纳入46例诊断为腰椎不稳的患者。参与者进行了侧屈、侧伸和3公斤举重屈曲腰骶脊柱x线摄影。同时对所有参与者进行MRI检查。计算每个腰椎水平的诊断参数,包括敏感性、特异性、阳性预测值、阴性预测值、准确性和似然比。采用类内相关系数(ICCs)评估信度。结果:与传统屈曲片相比,3公斤举重屈曲片在L3/4和L4/5水平检测脊柱不稳定的灵敏度更高(分别为88%对36%和83.3%对44.44%),但特异性较低(分别为61.9%对76.19%和70%对80%)。McNemar试验显示,3公斤举重屈曲x线片和MRI在这些水平上没有显著差异(p < 0.05)。可靠性评估显示了良好的观察者内部和观察者之间的一致性(ICC≥0.99)。此外,该技术是安全的,没有不良反应的报道。结论:3公斤举重屈曲x线片提高了腰椎不稳定诊断的敏感性和准确性,特别是在L3/4和L4/5水平,提供了可靠的筛查选择。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Asian Spine Journal
Asian Spine Journal ORTHOPEDICS-
CiteScore
5.10
自引率
4.30%
发文量
108
审稿时长
24 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信