SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Acta Orthopaedica et Traumatologica Turcica / 2014 / Cilt: 48 - Sayı: 6

Degenerative changes in the interspinous ligament

Jian-Feng ZHANG
Chao LIU
He-Jun YU
Jian-Jun MA
Hong-Xin CAI
Shun-Wu FAN
Pages
661–666
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

ISLD occurred in more severe disc degeneration.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Objective: The aim of this study was to investigate the imaging assessment of interspinous ligament degeneration (ISLD) in patients with or without low back pain (LBP).
📊
Key Findings & Data:Methods: Sixty patients with LBP were enrolled in Group A and 60 subjects frequency-matched by age and sex in Group B.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:ISLD occurred in more severe disc degeneration.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Objective: The aim of this study was to investigate the imaging assessment of interspinous ligament degeneration (ISLD) in patients with or without low back pain (LBP). Methods: Sixty patients with LBP were enrolled in Group A and 60 subjects frequency-matched by age and sex in Group B. An MRI-based grading system for ISLD was scored and ranged from Type A (normal) to Type D (severe). The lumbar disc was also graded according to degeneration at four lumbar levels. Results: Type A ISLD was the most prevalent type with 161 levels (67.1%) in Group A and 172 (71.7%) in Group B. Type D was the least frequent, seen in 13 levels in Group A and 3 in Group B. There was a significantly higher incidence of Type D ISLD in Group A than Group B (5.4% vs. 1.3%, p<0.05). The average age of patients with Type D ISLD in Group A was higher than Types A, B and C (Type A and B p<0.01, Type C p<0.05). In Group B, the age of patients with Type D ISLD was significantly higher than those with Type A (p<0.05). Although disc grade increased in advanced ISLD in both groups, only the difference between Type D and Types A and B in Group A were statistically significant (p<0.05). Conclusion: More advanced ISLD grades were less common in patients with or without LBP. Advanced change of the ISL was more common in patients with LBP. ISLD occurred in more severe disc degeneration.

🔖

Cite This Article

ZHANG, J., LIU, C., YU, H., MA, J., CAI, H., FAN, S. (2014). Degenerative changes in the interspinous ligament. Acta Orthopaedica et Traumatologica Turcica, Cilt: 48 - Sayı: 6, 661–666. https://ajindex.com/articles/353612

References (15)

  1. Adams MA, Hutton WC, Stott JR. The resistance to flexion of the lumbar intervertebral joint. Spine 1980;5:245- 53
  2. Dumas GA, Beaudoin L, Drouin G. In situ mechanical behavior of posterior spinal ligaments in the lumbar region. An in vitro study. J Biomech 1987;20:301-10
  3. Hindle RJ, Pearcy MJ, Cross A. Mechanical function of the human lumbar interspinous and supraspinous ligaments. J Biomed Eng 1990;12:340-4
  4. Gillespie KA, Dickey JP. Biomechanical role of lumbar spine ligaments in flexion and extension: determination using a parallel linkage robot and a porcine model. Spine 2004;29:1208-16
  5. Newman PH. Sprung back. J Bone Joint Surg Br 1952;34- B:30-7
  6. Vaccaro AR, Rihn JA, Saravanja D, Anderson DG, Hilibrand AS, Albert TJ, et al. Injury of the posterior ligamentous complex of the thoracolumbar spine: a prospective evaluation of the diagnostic accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging. Spine 2009;34:E841-7
  7. Goobar JE, Sartoris DJ, Hajek PC, Baker LL, Haghighi P, Hesselink J, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging of the lumbar spinous processes and adjacent soft tissues: normal and pathologic appearances. J Rheumatol 1987;14:788- 97
  8. Fujiwara A, Tamai K, An HS, Shimizu K, Yoshida H, Saotome K. The interspinous ligament of the lumbar spine. Magnetic resonance images and their clinical significance. Spine 2000;25:358-63
  9. Keorochana G, Taghavi CE, Tzeng ST, Lee KB, Liao JC, Yoo JH, et al. MRI classification of interspinous ligament degeneration of the lumbar spine: intraobserver and interobserver reliability and the frequency of disagreement. Eur Spine J 2010;19:1740-5
  10. Keorochana G, Taghavi CE, Tzeng ST, Morishita Y, Yoo JH, Lee KB, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging grading of interspinous ligament degeneration of the lumbar spine and its relation to aging, spinal degeneration, and segmental motion. J Neurosurg Spine 2010;13:494-9
  11. Pfirrmann CW, Metzdorf A, Zanetti M, Hodler J, Boos N. Magnetic resonance classification of lumbar intervertebral disc degeneration. Spine 2001;26:1873-8
  12. Cohen J. A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educ Psychol Meas 1960;20:37-46
  13. Landis JR, Koch GG. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 1977;33:159-74
  14. Kirkaldy-Willis WH, Wedge JH, Yong-Hing K, Reilly J. Pathology and pathogenesis of lumbar spondylosis and stenosis. Spine 1978;3:319-28
  15. Kirkaldy-Willis WH, Farfan HF. Instability of the lumbar spine. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1982;165:110-23