椎间盘退变的放射学和形态学分级系统的评估

K. Krupa
{"title":"椎间盘退变的放射学和形态学分级系统的评估","authors":"K. Krupa","doi":"10.18502/jsp.v1i1.9803","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction: Intervertebral disc (IVD) degeneration is considered to be one of the main pathophysiological causes of low back pain. Several grading systems have been developed for both morphological and radiological assessment. The aim of this study was to assess the morphological and radiological characteristics of IVD degeneration and validate popular radiological Pfirrmann scale against morphological Thompson grading system. \nMethodology: Full spinal columns (vertebrae L1-S1 and IVD between them) were harvested from cadavers through an anterior dissection. MRI scans of all samples were conducted. Then, all vertebral columns were cut in the midsagittal plane and assessed morphologically. \nResult: A total of 100 lumbar spine columns (446 IVDs) were included in the analysis of the degeneration grade. Morphologic Thompson scale graded the majority of discs as grade 2 and 3 (44.2% and 32.1%, respectively), followed by grade 4 (16.8%), grade 1 (5.8%), and grade 5 (1.1%). The Radiologic Pfirrmann grading system classified 44.2% of discs as grade 2, 32.1% as grade 3, 16.8% as grade 4, 5.8% as grade 1, and 1.1% as grade 5. The analysis on the effect of age on degeneration revealed significant, although moderate, positive correlation with both scales. Analysis of the agreement between scales showed weighted Cohen’s kappa equal to 0.61 (p < 0.001). Most of the disagreement occurred due to a 1-grade difference (91.5%), whereas only 8.5% due to a 2-grade difference. \nConclusion: With the increase in the prevalence of IVD disease in the population, reliable grading systems of IVD degeneration are crucial for spine surgeons in their clinical assessment. While overall there is an agreement between both grading systems, clinicians should remain careful when using Pfirmann scale as the grades tend to deviate from the morphological assessment.","PeriodicalId":199836,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Spine Practice (JSP)","volume":"86 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-11-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Assessment of Radiological and Morphological Grading Systems of Intervertebral Disc Degeneration\",\"authors\":\"K. Krupa\",\"doi\":\"10.18502/jsp.v1i1.9803\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Introduction: Intervertebral disc (IVD) degeneration is considered to be one of the main pathophysiological causes of low back pain. Several grading systems have been developed for both morphological and radiological assessment. The aim of this study was to assess the morphological and radiological characteristics of IVD degeneration and validate popular radiological Pfirrmann scale against morphological Thompson grading system. \\nMethodology: Full spinal columns (vertebrae L1-S1 and IVD between them) were harvested from cadavers through an anterior dissection. MRI scans of all samples were conducted. Then, all vertebral columns were cut in the midsagittal plane and assessed morphologically. \\nResult: A total of 100 lumbar spine columns (446 IVDs) were included in the analysis of the degeneration grade. Morphologic Thompson scale graded the majority of discs as grade 2 and 3 (44.2% and 32.1%, respectively), followed by grade 4 (16.8%), grade 1 (5.8%), and grade 5 (1.1%). The Radiologic Pfirrmann grading system classified 44.2% of discs as grade 2, 32.1% as grade 3, 16.8% as grade 4, 5.8% as grade 1, and 1.1% as grade 5. The analysis on the effect of age on degeneration revealed significant, although moderate, positive correlation with both scales. Analysis of the agreement between scales showed weighted Cohen’s kappa equal to 0.61 (p < 0.001). Most of the disagreement occurred due to a 1-grade difference (91.5%), whereas only 8.5% due to a 2-grade difference. \\nConclusion: With the increase in the prevalence of IVD disease in the population, reliable grading systems of IVD degeneration are crucial for spine surgeons in their clinical assessment. While overall there is an agreement between both grading systems, clinicians should remain careful when using Pfirmann scale as the grades tend to deviate from the morphological assessment.\",\"PeriodicalId\":199836,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Spine Practice (JSP)\",\"volume\":\"86 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-11-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Spine Practice (JSP)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.18502/jsp.v1i1.9803\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Spine Practice (JSP)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18502/jsp.v1i1.9803","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

导读:椎间盘退变被认为是腰痛的主要病理生理原因之一。形态学和放射学评估已经开发了几个分级系统。本研究的目的是评估IVD退变的形态学和放射学特征,并验证流行的放射学Pfirrmann量表和形态学汤普森分级系统。方法:通过前路剥离从尸体上获取完整的脊柱(L1-S1椎体和它们之间的IVD)。对所有样本进行核磁共振扫描。然后,在中矢状面切开所有脊柱并进行形态学评估。结果:共纳入100根腰椎柱(446根ivd)进行退变分级分析。形态学汤普森量表将大多数椎间盘分为2级和3级(分别为44.2%和32.1%),其次是4级(16.8%)、1级(5.8%)和5级(1.1%)。放射学Pfirrmann分级系统将44.2%的椎间盘分为2级,32.1%为3级,16.8%为4级,5.8%为1级,1.1%为5级。对年龄对退行性变的影响的分析显示,两种量表虽然适度,但显著正相关。量表间一致性分析显示加权Cohen 's kappa等于0.61 (p < 0.001)。大部分的分歧是由于1级的差异(91.5%),而只有8.5%是由于2级的差异。结论:随着人群中IVD患病率的增加,可靠的IVD退变分级系统对脊柱外科医生的临床评估至关重要。虽然两种分级系统总体上是一致的,但临床医生在使用Pfirmann量表时应保持谨慎,因为分级往往偏离形态学评估。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Assessment of Radiological and Morphological Grading Systems of Intervertebral Disc Degeneration
Introduction: Intervertebral disc (IVD) degeneration is considered to be one of the main pathophysiological causes of low back pain. Several grading systems have been developed for both morphological and radiological assessment. The aim of this study was to assess the morphological and radiological characteristics of IVD degeneration and validate popular radiological Pfirrmann scale against morphological Thompson grading system. Methodology: Full spinal columns (vertebrae L1-S1 and IVD between them) were harvested from cadavers through an anterior dissection. MRI scans of all samples were conducted. Then, all vertebral columns were cut in the midsagittal plane and assessed morphologically. Result: A total of 100 lumbar spine columns (446 IVDs) were included in the analysis of the degeneration grade. Morphologic Thompson scale graded the majority of discs as grade 2 and 3 (44.2% and 32.1%, respectively), followed by grade 4 (16.8%), grade 1 (5.8%), and grade 5 (1.1%). The Radiologic Pfirrmann grading system classified 44.2% of discs as grade 2, 32.1% as grade 3, 16.8% as grade 4, 5.8% as grade 1, and 1.1% as grade 5. The analysis on the effect of age on degeneration revealed significant, although moderate, positive correlation with both scales. Analysis of the agreement between scales showed weighted Cohen’s kappa equal to 0.61 (p < 0.001). Most of the disagreement occurred due to a 1-grade difference (91.5%), whereas only 8.5% due to a 2-grade difference. Conclusion: With the increase in the prevalence of IVD disease in the population, reliable grading systems of IVD degeneration are crucial for spine surgeons in their clinical assessment. While overall there is an agreement between both grading systems, clinicians should remain careful when using Pfirmann scale as the grades tend to deviate from the morphological assessment.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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