ArticleActa informatica medica : AIM : journal of the Society for Medical Informatics of Bosnia & Herzegovina : casopis Drustva za medicinsku informatiku BiH2019
Relationship Between Magnetic Resonance Imaging Findings and Clinical Symptoms in Patients with Suspected Lumbar Spinal Canal Stenosis: a Case-control Study.
Article in Acta informatica medica : AIM : journal of the Society for Medical Informatics of Bosnia & Herzegovina : casopis Drustva za medicinsku informatiku BiH, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- A neural network model for detection and classification of lumbar spinal stenosis on MRI.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 · 2024Article
- Article
- The association between clinical symptoms of lumbar spinal stenosis and MRI axial imaging findings.Fukushima journal of medical science · 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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionDespite the availability of many imaging and clinical criteria for diagnosis of lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS), its correct diagnosis is a challenge for clinicians and radiologists.
aimThe aim of this study was to examine the relationship between magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) findings and clinical symptoms in symptomatic and asymptomatic patients with suspected LSS in MRI.
methodsThis study is a case-control study. Two groups of 100 symptomatic and asymptomatic individuals (aged 20 to 84 years) with suspected lumbar spinal canal stenosis who referred to the imaging unit for lumbosacral MRI were included. The clinical symptoms and radiological parameters in MRI for all patients were recorded and relationship between them were evaluated.
resultsAmong the quantitative imaging findings, only the anterior-posterior diameter of the canal at the level of the intervertebral disc, the central spinal canal cross-section area and lateral recesses cross-sectional area were valuable. Coefficient of stenosis was calculated for the case and control groups which had statistically significant difference (p<0.001). The difference between qualitative findings such as disc protrusion, extrusion, sequestration and Cauda Equine serpain or redundant was significant between the two groups.
conclusionAccording to the results, among the quantitative criteria of MRI imaging findings, central spinal canal cross-section (less than 77.5 mm2 for central stenosis) and lateral recesses cross-section (less than 22.5 mm2 for lateral stenosis) had the highest sensitivity and specificity for LSS diagnosis in symptomatic and asymptomatic patients with suspected LSS. Strongest observed correlation was between neurogenic claudication and LSS diagnostic radiological markers.
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.