ArticleSkeletal radiology2021
Accurate prediction of lumbar microdecompression level with an automated MRI grading system.
Article in Skeletal radiology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Prevention and management of degenerative lumbar spine disorders through artificial intelligence-based decision support systems: a systematic review.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2025Pooled it
- The Quantitative Evaluation of Automatic Segmentation in Lumbar Magnetic Resonance Images.Neurospine · 2024Article
- Evaluating Computer Vision, Large Language, and Genome-Wide Association Models in a Limited Sized Patient Cohort for Pre-Operative Risk Stratification in Adult Spinal Deformity Surgery.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Machine Learning Predicts Decompression Levels for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis Using Canal Radiomic Features from Computed Tomography Myelography.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Revolutionizing Spinal Care: Current Applications and Future Directions of Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Review
- Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning Applications in Spine Surgery.International journal of spine surgery · 2023Article
- Current Applications of Machine Learning in Spine: From Clinical View.Global spine journal · 2022Review
- Artificial intelligence in spine care: current applications and future utility.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 · 2022Review
- External validation of the deep learning system "SpineNet" for grading radiological features of degeneration on MRIs of the lumbar spine.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 · 2022Article
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
objectiveLumbar spine MRI interpretations have high variability reducing utility for surgical planning. This study evaluated a convolutional neural network (CNN) framework that generates automated MRI grading for its ability to predict the level that was surgically decompressed. MATERIALS AND
methodsPatients who had single-level decompression were retrospectively evaluated. Sagittal T2 images were processed by a CNN (SpineNet), which provided grading for the following: central canal stenosis, disc narrowing, disc degeneration, spondylolisthesis, upper/lower endplate morphologic changes, and upper/lower marrow changes. The grades were used to calculate an aggregate score. The variables and the aggregate score were analyzed for their ability to predict the surgical level. For each surgical level subgroup, the surgical level aggregate scores were compared with the non-surgical levels.
resultsA total of 141 patients met the inclusion criteria (82 women, 59 men; mean age 64 years; age range 28-89 years). SpineNet did not identify central canal stenosis in 32 patients. Of the remaining 109, 96 (88%) patients had a decompression at the level of greatest stenosis. The higher stenotic grade was present only at the surgical level in 82/96 (85%) patients. The level with the highest aggregate score matched the surgical level in 103/141 (73%) patients and was unique to the surgical level in 91/103 (88%) patients. Overall, the highest aggregate score identified the surgical level in 91/141 (65%) patients. The aggregate MRI score mean was significantly higher for the L3-S1 surgical levels.
conclusionA previously developed CNN framework accurately predicts the level of microdecompression for degenerative spinal stenosis in most patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
32607805What 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.