Trial reportAJNR. American journal of neuroradiology2019
Comparison of [
Trial report in AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- [ 18 F]fluorodeoxyglucose PET/MRI for nononcological musculoskeletal indications: reference uptake values in the asymptomatic lumbar spine and example comparison to a low back pain patient.Nuclear medicine communications · 2026Article
- Foraminal [AJNR. American journal of neuroradiology · 2026Observational
- Intra-articular cervical facet joint corticosteroid injections in patients with increased peri-facet MRI STIR signal. A prospective, multi-center case series.Interventional pain medicine · 2025Article
- Added value of 18Fluorine-fluorodeoxyglucose (18F-FDG) PET/MRI for evaluation of failed back surgery syndrome: comparison with non-contrast MRI.Japanese journal of radiology · 2025Article
- Evaluation criteria for the assessment of occupational diseases of the lumbar spine - how reliable are they?BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
background and purposePrior retrospective studies have suggested that both T2 hyperintensity and gadolinium enhancement on fat-suppressed MR imaging are associated with lumbar facet joint pain, but prospective evaluation of FDG-PET/MR imaging with a standardized protocol and correlation to clinical findings are lacking. The primary aim was to prospectively assess a standardized FDG-PET/MRI protocol in patients with suspected facetogenic low back pain, with determination of the concordance of imaging and clinical findings. MATERIALS AND
methodsTen patients with clinically suspected facetogenic low back pain were prospectively recruited with a designation of specific facet joints implicated clinically. Subsequently, patients underwent an FDG-PET/MR imaging examination with gadolinium. Each facet joint was graded for perifacet signal change on MR imaging and FDG activity. The frequency and correlation of MR imaging, FDG-PET, and clinical findings were determined.
resultsFDG activity showed high concordance with high overall MR imaging scores (concordance correlation coefficient = 0.79). There was concordance of the clinical side of pain with the side of high overall MR imaging scores and increased FDG activity on 12/20 (60%) sides. Both a high overall MR imaging score (concordance correlation coefficient = 0.12) and FDG-PET findings positive for increased activity (concordance correlation coefficient = 0.10) had low concordance with the specific clinically implicated facet joints. Increased FDG activity or high MR imaging scores or both were present in only 10/29 (34%) facet joints that had been clinically selected for percutaneous intervention. Eleven (11%) facet joints that had not been selected for treatment demonstrated these imaging findings.
conclusionsThere was low concordance of perifacet signal change and FDG activity with clinically implicated facet joints. This could indicate either the potential to change patient management or a lack of biomarker accuracy. Therefore, additional larger randomized studies with the use of comparative medial branch blocks would be useful to further investigate the clinical utility of these findings.
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.