Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Percutaneous discography: comparison of low-dose CT, fluoroscopy and MRI in the diagnosis of lumbar disc disruption

  • Original Article
  • Published:
European Spine Journal Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Aim: To compare the diagnostic accuracy of low-dose computed tomography (CT), magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and fluoroscopy in percutaneous discography in patients scheduled for lumbar spondylodesis. Material and methods: Within a prospective pilot study, 18 disc segments of 11 patients with radicular or pseudoradicular pain prior to anteroposterior spondylodesis were evaluated. After injection of a mixture of non-ionic iodine-containing contrast agent and gadolinium-based contrast medium into the disc spaces, all patients underwent conventional fluoroscopy, as well as low-dose CT and MRI. The occurrence of memory pain during contrast injection was recorded. CT, MRI and fluoroscopic images were analyzed independently by two readers blinded to the clinical findings. Results: There was 100% agreement between CT and MRI discography in the detection, localization and grading of degenerative changes. In contrast, conventional fluoroscopy identified only 9 of the 12 abnormal segments. Memory pain following puncture was identified in 3 of the 12 affected segments. Summary: Low-dose CT and MRI discography have a similar accuracy in the assessment of disc disruption and they are superior to fluoroscopic discography.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Anderson SR, Flanagan B (2000) Discography. Curr Rev Pain 4:345–352

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Bernard TN (1994) Using computed tomography/discography and enhanced magnetic resonance imaging to distinguish between scar tissue and recurrent lumbar disc herniation. Spine 19:2826–2832

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Bogduk N, Modic MT (1996) Lumbar discography. Spine 21:402–404

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Calzado A, Rodriguez R, Munoz A (2000) Quality criteria implementation for brain and lumbar spine CT examinations. Br J Radiol 73:384–395

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Carragee EJ, Chen Y, Tanner CM, Truong T, Lau E, Brito JL (2000) Can discography cause long-term back symptoms in previously asymptomatic subjects? Spine 25:1803–1808

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Carragee EJ, Barcohana B, Alamin T, van den Haak E (2004) Prospective controlled study of the development of lower back pain in previously asymptomatic subjects undergoing experimental discography. Spine 29:1112–1117

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Cohnen M, Poll LW, Puettmann C, Ewen K, Saleh A, Mödder U (2003) Effective doses in standard protocols for multi-slice CT scanning. Eur Radiol 13:1148–1153

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Collins CD, Stack JP, O’Connell DJ, Walsh M, McManus FP, Redmond OM, Ennis JT (1990) The role of discography in lumbar disc disease: a comparative study of magnetic resonance imaging and discography. Clin Radiol 42:252–257

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Connor PM, Darden BV (1993) Clinical discography complications and clinical efficacy. Spine 18:2035–2038

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Eisenstein S, Roberts S (2003) The physiology of the disc and its clinical relevance. J Bone Joint Surg Br 85:633–636

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Falco FJ, Moran JG (2003) Lumbar discography using gadolinium in patients with iodine contrast allergy followed by postdiscography computed tomography scan. Spine 28:E1–E4

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Grasshoff H, Kayser R, Mahlfeld U, Mahlfeld K (2001) Discography findings and results of percutaneous laser disk decompression. Rofo 173:191–194

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Guyer RD, Ohnmeiss DD (2003) Lumbar discography. Spine J 3:11S–27S

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Hirsch C, Inglemark BE, Miller M (1963) The anatomical basis for low back pain. Acta Orthop Scand 33:1–17

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Huang TS, Zucherman JF, Hsu KY, Shapiro M, Lentz D, Gartland J (2002) Gadopentetate dimeglumine as an intradiscal contrast agent. Spine 27:839–843

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Lindblom K (1948) Diagnostic puncture of intervertebral disks in sciatica. Acta Orthop Scand 17:231–238

    Google Scholar 

  17. Min K, Leu HJ, Perrenoud A (1996) Discography with manometry and discography CT: their value to patient selection for percutaneous lumbar nucletomy. Bull Hosp Jt Dis 54:153–157

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Mini R (1995) Strahlenexporition in der Rőntgendiagnostik ssk Verőeffentlichungen. Band 30:49–74

    Google Scholar 

  19. Modic M, Masaryk T, Ross J, Carter J (1988) Imaging of degenerative disk disease. Radiology 168:177–186

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Ohnmeiss DD, Vanharanta H, Ekholm J (1999) Relation between pain location and disc pathology: a study of pain drawings and CT/discography. Clin J Pain 15:210–217

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Parfenchuck TA, Janssen ME (1994) A correlation of cervical magnetic resonance imaging and discography/computed tomographic discograms. Spine 19:2819–2825

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Pearce RH, Thompson JP, Bebault GM, Flak B (1991) Magnetic resonance imaging reflects the chemical changes of aging degeneration in the human intervertebral disk. J Rheumatol Suppl 27:42–43

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Poynton AR, Hinman A, Lutz G, Farmer J (2005) Discography-induced acute lumbar disc herniation: a report of five cases. J Spinal Disord Tech 18(2):188–192

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Osti OL, Fraser RD, Vernon-Roberts B (1990) Discitis after discography. The role of prophylactic antibiotics. J Bone Joint Surg Br 72:271–274

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Sequeiros RB, Klemola R, Ojala R, Jyrkinen L, Vaara T, Tervonen O (2003) Percutaneous MR-guided discography in a low-field system using optical instrument tracking: a feasibility study. J Magn Reson Imaging 17:214–219

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Stamm G, Nagel HD (2002) CT-expo—a novel program for dose evaluation in CT. Rofo 174:1570–1576

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Weishaupt D, Zanetti M, Hodler J, Min K, Fuchs B, Pfirrmann CW, Boos N (2001) Painful lumbar disk derangement: relevance of endplate abnormalities at MR imaging. Radiology 218:420–427

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Willems PC, Jacobs W, Duinkerke E, De Kleuver M (2003) Lumbar discography: should we use prophylactic antibiotics? a study of 435 consecutive discograms and a systematic review of the literature. J Spinal Disord Tech 17:243–247

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Radiology, Charité, Schumannstr. 21, Campus Mitte, 10117, Berlin, Germany

    Claudia Kluner, Dietmar Kivelitz, Patrik Rogalla, Bernd Hamm & Christian Enzweiler

  2. Orthopaedic Surgery, Charité, Berlin, Germany

    Michael Putzier

Authors
  1. Claudia Kluner
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Dietmar Kivelitz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Patrik Rogalla
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Michael Putzier
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Bernd Hamm
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Christian Enzweiler
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Claudia Kluner.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Kluner, C., Kivelitz, D., Rogalla, P. et al. Percutaneous discography: comparison of low-dose CT, fluoroscopy and MRI in the diagnosis of lumbar disc disruption. Eur Spine J 15, 620–626 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-005-1030-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-005-1030-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation