Observational studyMedicine2018
Facet joint hypertrophy is a misnomer: A retrospective study.
Observational study in Medicine, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Quantitative Radiological Characteristics of the Facet Joints in Patients with Lumbar Foraminal Stenosis.Journal of pain research · 2022Article
- In vivo relationships between lumbar facet joint and intervertebral disc composition and diurnal deformation.Clinical biomechanics (Bristol, Avon) · 2021Article
- The Relationship between Neural Foraminal Stenosis and Imaging Features of Lumbar Spine MRI in Patients Older Than 60 Years with Lumbar Radiculopathy.Taehan Yongsang Uihakhoe chi · 2021Article
- Percutaneous spinal endoscopy with unilateral interlaminar approach to perform bilateral decompression for central lumbar spinal stenosis: radiographic and clinical assessment.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2021Article
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 at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
One of the major causes of lumbar spinal canal stenosis (LSCS) has been considered facet joint hypertrophy (FJH). However, a previous study asserted that "FJH" is a misnomer because common facet joints are no smaller than degenerative facet joints; however, this hypothesis has not been effectively demonstrated. Therefore, in order to verify that FJH is a misnomer in patients with LSCS, we devised new morphological parameters that we called facet joint thickness (FJT) and facet joint cross-sectional area (FJA).We collected FJT and FJA data from 114 patients with LSCS. A total of 86 control subjects underwent lumbar magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) as part of routine medical examinations, and axial T2-weighted MRI images were obtained from all participants. We measured FJT by drawing a line along the facet area and then measuring the narrowest point at L4-L5. We measured FJA as the whole cross-sectional area of the facet joint at the stenotic L4-L5 level.The average FJT was 1.60 ± 0.36 mm in the control group and 1.11 ± 0.32 mm in the LSCS group. The average FJA was 14.46 ± 5.17 mm in the control group and 9.31 ± 3.47 mm in the LSCS group. Patients with LSCS had significantly lower FJTs (P < .001) and FJAs (P < .001).FJH, a misnomer, should be renamed facet joint area narrowing. Using this terminology would eliminate confusion in descriptions of the facet joint.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.