Journals / Türkiye Fiziksel Tıp ve Rehabilitasyon Dergisi / 2010 / Cilt: 56 - Sayı: 2

Lomber spinal stenozda elektrodiagnoz: Bir derleme

Electrodiagnosis in lumbar spinal stenosis: A review

Pages
75–80
Publication Date
2022-11-05
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)

LSS can be quite debilitating and can have a profound negative effect on one’s activities of daily living and overall quality of life.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) is a narrowing of the spinal canal and/or the neuroforamina through which the spinal cord roots enter and exit.
📊
Key Findings & Data:When compared to electrodiagnostic studies, CT and MRI have been shown to have increased false negative and false positive rates.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:LSS can be quite debilitating and can have a profound negative effect on one’s activities of daily living and overall quality of life.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS) is a narrowing of the spinal canal and/or the neuroforamina through which the spinal cord roots enter and exit. The symptoms of LSS usually begin over the course of several months and include neurogenic claudication. This is characterized by low back pain that radiates down one or both legs producing pain or weakness. LSS can be quite debilitating and can have a profound negative effect on one’s activities of daily living and overall quality of life. Imaging studies, such as computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) are routinely performed in the work-up of suspected LSS. In recent years, there has been much controversy over the actual clinical usefulness of these studies. When compared to electrodiagnostic studies, CT and MRI have been shown to have increased false negative and false positive rates. Electrodiagnostic studies show dynamic physiological neural function and has become a valuable tool in LSS. This information can be used to determine the location and severity of LSS, differentiate LSS from other conditions, and monitor the progression. Electrodiagnostic techniques such as somatosensory evoked potentials, dermatomal somatosensory evoked potentials (DSEPs), and paraspinal mapping (PM) increase both the sensitivity and specificity in diagnosing LSS. DSEPs provide useful information on multi-level, multiple rootlet disease. PM reflects the physiology of nerve roots and has been found to be superior to extremity needle EMG. Electrodiagnostic techniques are becoming the standard in the diagnosis and therapeutic decisions for LSS and other related diseases.

Özet

Spinal kanalda ya da sinir köklerinin geçtiği nöral foramenlerde daralma lomber spinal stenoz (LSS) olarak adlandırılır. LSS yaşam kalitesini belirgin derecede etkileyip engelliliğe neden olabilir. LSS’nin belirtileri aylar içinde ortaya çıkar. Nörojenik klodikasyon, tek ya da her iki alt ekstremiteye yayılan bel ağrısı ve güçsüzlük LSS’nin semptomları arasında sayılabilir. LSS düşünülen olgularda bilgisayarlı tomografi (BT) ve manyetik rezonans görüntüleme (MRG) gibi yöntemler rutin olarak kullanılmaktadır. Fakat bu tetkiklerin LSS tanısına katkısı ile ilgili tartışmalar giderek artmaktadır. Elektrodiagnostik çalışmalarla karşılaştırıldığında BT ve MRG’nin yalancı negatif ve yalancı pozitiflikleri daha fazladır. Nöral fonksiyonların gerçek zamanlı durumunu ortaya koyan elektrodiagnostik incelemeler LSS’de oldukça yararlıdır. Elektrodiagnoz ayrıca, LSS’nin lokalizasyonu ve şiddeti konusunda bilgi verir; hastalığın ayırıcı tanısında ve progresyonunun takibinde de yararlıdır. Somatosensoriyel uyandırılmış potansiyeller, dermatomal somatosensoriyel uyandırılmış potansiyeller (DSEP) ve paraspinal haritalama (PH) gibi elektrodiagnostik teknikler LSS tanısında duyarlılık ve özgüllüğü arttırmaktadır. DSEP, birden fazla kökü ilgilendiren durumlarda yararlıdır. PH ise sinir köklerinin fizyolojik durumunu yansıtır ve ekstremite iğne EMG’sine üstün olduğu gösterilmiştir. Günümüzde elektrodiagnostik incelemeler LSS’nin ve ilişkili durumların tanısında ve tedavi seçeneklerinin belirlenmesinde standart inceleme yöntemleri haline gelmektedir.

🔖

Cite This Article

GÜNDÜZ, O. H., KISHNER, S., MUNSHI, S., GOYENECHE, N., GUPTA, S. (2022). Lomber spinal stenozda elektrodiagnoz: Bir derleme. Türkiye Fiziksel Tıp ve Rehabilitasyon Dergisi, Cilt: 56 - Sayı: 2, 75–80. https://ajindex.com/articles/629045

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (17)

  1. Rydevik B, Brown MD, Lundborg G. Pathoanatomy and pathophysiology of nerve root compression. Spine 1984;9:7-15
  2. Singh K, Samartzis D, Vaccaro AR, Nassr A, Andersson BJ, Yoon ST, et al. Congenital lumbar spinal stenosis: a prospective, control-matched, cohort radiographic analysis. Spine J 2005;5:615-22
  3. Dimaio S, Marmor E, Albrecht S, Mohr G. Ligamentum flavum cysts causing incapacitating lumbar spinal stenosis. Can J Neurol Sci 2005;32:237-42
  4. Sairyo K, Biyani A, Goel V, Leaman D, Booth R, Thomas J, et al. Pathomechanism of ligamentum flavum hypertrophy: a multi-disciplinary investigation based on clinical, biomechanical, histologic, and biologic assessments. Spine 2005;30:2649-56
  5. Akuthota V, Lento P, Sowa G. Pathogenesis of lumbar spinal stenosis pain: why does an asymptomatic stenotic patient flare? Phys Med Rehabil Clin N Am 2003;14:17-28
  6. Szpalski M, Gunzburg R. Lumbar spinal stenosis: clinical features and new trends in surgical treatment. Geriatr Times 2004;5:11-3
  7. Kauffman C, Garfin SR. Spinal stenosis: pathophysiology and symptom complex update 1999. Semin Spine Surg 1999;11:209-14
  8. Katz JN. Lumbar disc disorders and low-back pain: socioeconomic factors and consequences. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2006;2:21
  9. Taylor VM, Deyo RA, Cherkin DC, Kreuter W. Low back pain hospitalization: recent US trends and regional variations. Spine 1994;19:1207-11
  10. Atlas SJ, Delitto A. Spinal stenosis: surgical versus nonsurgical treatment. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2006;443:198-207
  11. Weiner DK. Office management of chronic pain in the elderly. Am J Med 2007;120:306-15
  12. Inufusa A, An HS, Lim TH, Hasegawa T, Haughton VM, Nowicki BH. Anatomic changes of the spinal canal and intervertebral foramen associated with flexion–extension movement. Spine 1996;21:2412-20
  13. Takahashi K, Kagechika K, Takino T, Matsui T, Shima I. Changes in epidural pressure during walking in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis. Spine 1995;20:2746-9
  14. Kobayashi S, Baba H, Uchida K, Kokubu Y, Yayama T, Takeno K, et al. Blood circulation of cauda equina and nerve root [Japanese]. Clin Calcium 2005;15:63-72
  15. Siebert E, Prüss H, Klingebiel R, Failli V, Einhäupl KM, Schwab JM. Lumbar spinal stenosis: syndrome, diagnostics and treatment. Nat Rev Neurol 2009;5:392-403
  16. Kent DL, Haynor DR, Larson EB, Deyo RA. Diagnosis of lumbar spinal stenosis in adults: a meta-analysis of the accuracy of CT, MR, and myelography. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1992;158:1135-44
  17. Boden SD