ArticleCureus2024
The Clinical Utility of Repeating Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) Scans Within 12 Months in the Management of Lumbosacral Degenerative Disc Disease.
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Vanishing vacuum disc phenomenon: A diagnostic key in spinal infection.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 · 2025Article
- Intervertebral disc anomaly intelligent classification system based on deep learning, IDAICS.Frontiers in radiology · 2025Article
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 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeMagnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is the gold standard investigation for lumbosacral degenerative disc disease. However, there is controversy regarding the clinical value of repeating an MRI scan within 12 months when a patient presents with recurring or changing symptoms. This study measures rates of radiological change in a real-world cohort to guide clinicians when deciding to repeat a scan.
methodsAll patients over a 10-year window in one general hospital who underwent two lumbosacral MRI scans for degenerative disc disease within 12 months of each other were included in the study. All MRI reports were manually reviewed. The level of main vertebral pathology was recorded, along with the location of a disc prolapse. Time intervals between the two scans were calculated, and these were collated into 30-day intervals for analysis. The repeat scans were categorized into three groups: no change, radiological improvement, and radiological deterioration. Patients who had clinically significant deterioration in the form of cauda equina compression on MRI scans were recorded.
findingsFour hundred and eighty-one patients were included for analysis. Three hundred and ninety (81%) showed no change in MRI findings, 18 (3.7%) had improvements in their repeat scans, and 73 (15.3%) demonstrated deterioration in their repeat scans. Of the 73 patients with radiological deterioration, three patients (0.62% of the total) required urgent surgical intervention for cauda equina syndrome (CES).
conclusionsThough there is no alternative to detailed clinical assessment in determining whether a repeat MRI scan is indicated, the findings demonstrate that repeating MRI within 12 months for patients with lumbosacral degenerative disc disease has a low chance of altering the management plan. Over the 10-year period, only three patients required an urgent change to their clinical management. We believe this data can help guide clinical decision-making when considering a repeat scan.
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.