Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37841035›Full record

ArticleSpine surgery and related research2023

Are T1-Weighted Three-Dimensional Magnetic Resonance Images Inferior to T2-Weighted Images for Diagnosing Lumbar Foraminal Stenosis in the Fifth Lumbar Nerve Root? A Prospective, Comparative Study in Identical Patients.

Ko Hashimoto, Yasuhisa Tanaka, Takumi Tsubakino, Takeshi Hoshikawa, Chikashi Kawahara, Tomowaki Nakagawa, Satoshi Tateda, Kohei Takahashi, Manabu Suzuki, Takahiro Onoki and 8 more

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Spine surgery and related research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact, top 82% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

18 authors at 8 institutions in 3 countries.

Ko HashimotoDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Tohoku University Graduate School of Medicine, Sendai, Japan.
Yasuhisa TanakaDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Tohoku Central Hospital, Yamagata, Japan.
Takumi TsubakinoDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Tohoku Central Hospital, Yamagata, Japan.
Takeshi HoshikawaSendai Orthopaedic Hospital, Sendai, Japan.
Chikashi KawaharaDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Sendai Nishitaga Hospital, Sendai, Japan.
Tomowaki NakagawaSendai Orthopaedic Hospital, Sendai, Japan.
Satoshi TatedaDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Ishinomaki Red Cross Hospital, Ishinomaki, Japan.
Kohei TakahashiDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Tohoku University Graduate School of Medicine, Sendai, Japan.
Manabu SuzukiDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Tohoku Central Hospital, Yamagata, Japan.
Takahiro OnokiDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Tohoku University Graduate School of Medicine, Sendai, Japan.
Haruo KannoDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Tohoku Medical and Pharmaceutical University, Sendai, Japan.
Naoki MorozumiDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Sendai Nishitaga Hospital, Sendai, Japan.
Yutaka KoizumiDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Sendai Nishitaga Hospital, Sendai, Japan.
Masahito HondaDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Takeda General Hospital, Aizu-wakamatsu, Japan.
Takashi KusakabeDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Tohoku Rosai Hospital, Sendai, Japan.
Masaru SudaDepartment of Radiology, Tohoku Central Hospital, Yamagata, Japan.
Shoichi KokubunDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Sendai Nishitaga Hospital, Sendai, Japan.
Toshimi AizawaDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Tohoku University Graduate School of Medicine, Sendai, Japan.
Sendai Nishitaga National Hospital · JPTohoku University Hospital · JPIjinkai Takeda General Hospital · JPOrthopaedic Hospital · USTohoku University · JPRed Cross Hospital · GRTohoku Medical and Pharmaceutical University · JPTohoku Rosai Hospital · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Imaging analysis of foraminal stenosis in the fifth lumbar (L5) nerve root remains to be a challenge because of the anatomical complexity of the lumbosacral transition. T2-weighted three-dimensional (3D) magnetic resonance images (MRI) have been dominantly used for diagnosis of lumbar foraminal stenosis, while the reliability of T1-weighted images (WI) has also been proven. In this study, we aim to compare the reliability and reproducibility of T1- and T2-weighted 3D MRI in diagnosing lumbar foraminal stenosis (LFS) of the L5 nerve root. Methods: In this study, 39 patients with unilateral L5 radiculopathy (20 had L4-L5 intracanal stenosis; 19 had L5-S foraminal stenosis) were enrolled, prospectively. T1- and T2-weighted 3D lumbar MRI were obtained from each patient. T1WI and T2WI were blinded and then separately reviewed twice by four examiners randomly. The examiners were instructed to answer the side of LFS or absence of LFS. The correct answer rate, sensitivity, specificity, and area under the curve were analyzed and compared between T1WI and T2WI. Also, intra- and interobserver agreements were calculated using kappa (κ)-statistics and compared in the same manner. Results: The average correct answer rate, sensitivity, specificity, and area under the curve of the T1WI/T2WI were 84.6%/80.1%, 82.9%/80.3%, 86.3%/81.3%, and 0.846/0.801, respectively. The intraobserver κ-values of the four examiners ranged from 0.692 to 0.916 (average: 0.762) and from 0.669 to 0.801 (average: 0.720) for T1WI and T2WI, respectively. The interobserver κ-values calculated in a round-robin manner (24 combinations in total) ranged from 0.544 to 0.790 (average: 0.657) and from 0.524 to 0.828 (average: 0.652), respectively. Conclusions: As per our findings, T1- and T2-weighted 3D MRI were determined to have nearly equivalent reliability and reproducibility in terms of diagnosing LFS of the L5 nerve root.

Indexed as

fifth lumbar nerve rootinterobserver agreementintraobserver agreementLumbar foraminal stenosisreliabilityreproducibilitythree-dimensional MRI

Identifiers

PMID37841035
PMCPMC10569809
OpenAlexW4366547829

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.