Journals / Neurological sciences and neurophysiology (Online) / 2021 / Cilt: 38 - Sayı: 3

The Role of Electrophysiology in the Diagnosis of Radiculopathy and its Comparison with Magnetic Resonance Imaging

Pages
151–157
Publication Date
2022-10-19
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)

Conclusion: Although EMG has indisputable importance in the diagnosis of radiculopathy, its use with MRI significantly increases the diagnostic power at most spinal levels.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Objectives: Patients are frequently referred to electrophysiology laboratories by physicians from various specialties with a presumptive diagnosis of radiculopathy.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Recent advances in spinal imaging techniques have led to an increase in magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) studies in the diagnosis of radiculopathy.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Conclusion: Although EMG has indisputable importance in the diagnosis of radiculopathy, its use with MRI significantly increases the diagnostic power at most spinal levels.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Objectives: Patients are frequently referred to electrophysiology laboratories by physicians from various specialties with a presumptive diagnosis of radiculopathy. Recent advances in spinal imaging techniques have led to an increase in magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) studies in the diagnosis of radiculopathy. This study aimed to compare these two techniques in the diagnosis of radiculopathy. Subjects and Methods: Data of 170 patients who were diagnosed as having radiculopathy using electrophysiologic studies in our laboratory by defining a myotome level and who had spinal MRI examinations in our hospital database were included in the study. Results: Among the 170 patients in our study, 40% (n = 68) had cervical radiculopathy and 60% (n = 102) had lumbar radiculopathy. In the electrophysiologic diagnosis of radiculopathy, the most sensitive root level of electromyography (EMG) was the C7 radix level in the cervical region and the L5 level in the lumbar region. Correlations between radiologic grading based on foraminal assessments for radicular involvement at the cervical region using MRI and EMG data showed fair agreement in C5, C7, and C8 radix levels (κ: 0.21–0.40), and the lumbar region showed fair agreement in L4 and L5 radix levels (κ: 0.21–0.40). Conclusion: Although EMG has indisputable importance in the diagnosis of radiculopathy, its use with MRI significantly increases the diagnostic power at most spinal levels.

🔖

Cite This Article

ARICI, Ş., GELAL, M. F., SEÇİL, Y., İNCESU, T. K., BÖLÜK, E., UZUNOĞLU, C., ÇETİNOĞLU, Y. K. (2022). The Role of Electrophysiology in the Diagnosis of Radiculopathy and its Comparison with Magnetic Resonance Imaging. Neurological sciences and neurophysiology (Online), Cilt: 38 - Sayı: 3, 151–157. https://ajindex.com/articles/584300

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (15)

  1. Li JM, Tavee J. Electrodiagnosis of radiculopathy. Handb Clin Neurol 2019;161:305‑16
  2. So YT, Weber CF, Campbell WW. American Association of Electrodiagnostic Medicine, American Academy of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation Practice parameter for needle electromyographic evaluation of patients with suspected cervical radiculopathy: Summary statement. Muscle Nerve 1999;22:209‑11
  3. Kim S, Lee JW, Chai JW, Yoo HJ, Kang Y, Seo J,et al. A new MRI grading system for cervical foraminal stenosis based on axial T2‑weighted images. Korean J Radiol 2015;16:1294‑302
  4. Lee S, Lee JW, Yeom JS, Kim KJ, Kim HJ, Chung SK,et al. A practical MRI grading system for lumbar foraminal stenosis. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2010;194:1095‑8
  5. Landis JR, Koch GG. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics 1977;33:159‑74
  6. Clopper CJ, Pearson ES. The use of confidence or fiducial limits illustrated in the case of the binomial. Biometrika 1934;26:404‑13
  7. Radhakrishnan K, Litchy WJ, O’Fallon WM, Kurland LT. Epidemiology of cervical radiculopathy. A population‑based study from Rochester, Minnesota, 1976 through 1990. Brain 1994;117 (Pt 2):325‑35
  8. Tarulli AW, Raynor EM. Lumbosacral radiculopathy. Neurol Clin 2007;25:387‑405
  9. Jensen MC, Brant‑Zawadzki MN, Obuchowski N, Modic MT, Malkasian D, Ross JS. Magnetic resonance imaging of the lumbar spine in people without back pain. N Engl J Med 1994;331:69‑73
  10. Park HJ, Kim SS, Lee SY, Park NH, Chung EC, Rho MH,et al. A practical MRI grading system for cervical foraminal stenosis based on oblique sagittal images. Br J Radiol 2013;86:20120515
  11. Kang Y, Lee JW, Koh YH, Hur S, Kim SJ, Chai JW,et al. New MRI grading system for the cervical canal stenosis. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2011;197:W134‑40
  12. Park HJ, Kim SS, Han CH, Lee SY, Chung EC, Kim MS, et al. The clinical correlation of a new practical MRI method for grading cervical neural foraminal stenosis based on oblique sagittal images. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2014;203:412‑7
  13. Wildermuth S, Zanetti M, Duewell S, Schmid MR, Romanowski B, Benini A, et al. Lumbar spine: Quantitative and qualitative assessment of positional (upright flexion and extension) MR imaging and myelography. Radiology 1998;207:391‑8
  14. Levin KH. Approach to the patient with suspected radiculopathy. Neurol Clin 2012;30:581‑604
  15. Yoss RE, Corbin KB, Maccarty CS, Love JG. Significance of symptoms and signs in localization of involved root in cervical disk protrusion. Neurology 1