Trial reportSkeletal radiology2012
Reliability of change in lumbar MRI findings over time in patients with and without disc prosthesis--comparing two different image evaluation methods.
Trial report in Skeletal radiology, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01704677 (Lumbar Disc Prosthesis Versus Multidisciplinary Rehabilitation in Chronic Back Pain and Localized Degenerative Disc. Long Term Follow-up of a Randomized Multicentre Trial), which is not on this map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Lumbar Disc Prosthesis Versus Multidisciplinary Rehabilitation in Chronic Back Pain and Localized Degenerative Disc. Long Term Follow-up of a Randomized Multicentre Trial
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Total disc replacement for chronic back pain in the presence of disc degeneration.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2012Pooled it
- Fat in the lumbar multifidus muscles - predictive value and change following disc prosthesis surgery and multidisciplinary rehabilitation in patients with chronic low back pain and degenerative disc: 2-year follow-up of a randomized trial.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2017Trial
- Optimizing success with lumbar disc arthroplasty.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2014Trial
- Dixon T2 imaging of vertebral bone edema: reliability and comparison with short tau inversion recovery.Acta radiologica (Stockholm, Sweden : 1987) · 2024Article
- Facet arthropathy evaluation: CT or MRI?European radiology · 2019Article
- Five-year development of lumbar disc degeneration-a prospective study.Skeletal radiology · 2019Article
- Disc and nerve root findings on lumbar MRI with straightened v s flexed hips and knees-pilot study.The British journal of radiology · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo assess the reliability of change in lumbar magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) findings evaluated retrospectively by direct comparison of images and by non-comparison. MATERIALS AND
methodsPre-treatment and 2-year follow-up MRI was performed in 126 patients randomized to disc prosthesis surgery or non-surgical treatment. Two experienced radiologists independently evaluated progress and regress for Modic changes, disc findings, and facet arthropathy (FA) at L3/L4, L4/L5, and L5/S1, both by non-comparison and by comparison of initial and follow-up images. FA was evaluated at all levels, and other findings at non-operated levels. We calculated prevalence- and bias-adjusted kappa (PABAK) values for interobserver agreement. The impact of an adjacent prosthesis (which causes artefacts) and image evaluation method on PABAK was assessed using generalized estimating equations.
resultsImage comparison indicated good interobserver agreement on progress and regress (PABAK 0.63-1.00) for Modic changes, posterior high-intensity zone, disc height, and disc contour at L3-S1 and for nucleus pulposus signal and FA at L3/L4; and moderate interobserver agreement (PABAK 0.46-0.59) on decreasing nucleus signal and increasing FA at L4-S1. Image comparison indicated lower (but fair) interobserver agreement (PABAK 0.29) only for increasing FA at L5/S1 in patients with prosthesis in L4/L5 and/or L5/S1. An adjacent prosthesis had no overall impact on PABAK values (p ≥ 0.22). Comparison yielded higher PABAK values than non-comparison (p < 0.001).
conclusionsRegarding changes in lumbar MRI findings over time, comparison of images can provide moderate or good interobserver agreement, and better agreement than non-comparison. An adjacent prosthesis may not reduce agreement on change for most findings.
Indexed as
Identifiers
22430564What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.