Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Relationship between sedimentation sign and morphological grade in symptomatic lumbar spinal stenosis

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

Abstract

Purpose

We aimed to study the relationship between two morphological parameters recently described on MRI images in relation to lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS): the first is the sedimentation sign (SedS) and the second is the morphological grading of lumbar stenosis.

Materials and methods

MRIs from a total of 137 patients were studied. From those, 110 were issued from a prospective database of symptomatic LSS patients, of whom 73 were treated surgically and 37 conservatively based on symptom severity. A third group consisting of 27 subjects complaining of low back pain (LBP) served as control. Severity of stenosis was judged at disc level using the four A to D grade morphological classification. The presence of a SedS was judged at pedicle level, above or below the site of maximal stenosis.

Results

A positive SedS was observed in 58, 69 and 76 % of patients demonstrating B, C and D morphology, respectively, but in none with grade A morphology. The SedS was positive in 67 and 35 % of the surgically and conservatively treated patients, respectively, and in 8 % of the LBP group. C and D morphological grades were present in 97 and 35 % of patients in the surgically and conservatively treated group, respectively, and in 18 % of the LBP group. Presence of a positive SedS carried an increased risk of being submitted to surgery in the symptomatic LSS group (OR 3.5). This risk was even higher in the LSS patients demonstrating grade C or D morphology (OR 65).

Discussion and conclusion

One-third of surgically treated LSS patients do not present a SedS. This sign appears to be a lesser predictor of treatment modality in our setting of symptomatic LSS patients compared to the severity of stenosis judged by the morphological grade.

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

Access this article

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Schonstrom NS, Bolender NF, Spengler DM (1985) The pathomorphology of spinal stenosis as seen on CT scans of the lumbar spine. Spine 10(9):806–811

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Wilmink JT, Korte JH, Penning L (1988) Dimensions of the spinal canal in individuals symptomatic and non-symptomatic for sciatica: a CT study. Neuroradiology 30(6):547–550

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Schizas C, Theumann N, Burn A, Tansey R, Wardlaw D, Smith FW, Kulik G (2010) Qualitative grading of severity of lumbar spinal stenosis based on the morphology of the dural sac on magnetic resonance images. Spine 35(21):1919–1924. doi:10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181d359bd

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Barz T, Melloh M, Staub LP, Lord SJ, Lange J, Roder CP, Theis JC, Merk HR (2010) Nerve root sedimentation sign: evaluation of a new radiological sign in lumbar spinal stenosis. Spine 35(8):892–897. doi:10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181c7cf4b

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Jackson A, Isherwood I (1994) Does degenerative disease of the lumbar spine cause arachnoiditis? A magnetic resonance study and review of the literature. Br J Radiol 67(801):840–847. doi:10.1259/0007-1285-67-801-840

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Laitt R, Jackson A, Isherwood I (1996) Patterns of chronic adhesive arachnoiditis following Myodil myelography: the significance of spinal canal stenosis and previous surgery. Br J Radiol 69(824):693–698. doi:10.1259/0007-1285-69-824-693

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Schizas C, Kulik G (2012) Decision-making in lumbar spinal stenosis: a survey on the influence of the morphology of the dural sac. J Bone Joint Surg Br 94(1):98–101. doi:10.1302/0301-620X.94B1.27420

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. van Roy P, Barbaix E, Clarijs JP, Mense S (2001) Anatomical background of low back pain: variability and degeneration of the lumbar spinal canal and intervertebral disc. Schmerz 15(6):418–424. doi:10.1007/s004820100026

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Fazal A, Yoo A, Bendo JA (2013) Does the presence of the nerve root sedimentation sign on MRI correlate with the operative level in patients undergoing posterior lumbar decompression for lumbar stenosis? Spine J 13(8):837–842. doi:10.1016/j.spinee.2013.02.067

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Macedo LG, Wang Y, Battie MC (2013) The sedimentation sign for differential diagnosis of lumbar spinal stenosis. Spine 38(10):827–831. doi:10.1097/BRS.0b013e31827e8ecd

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Ishimoto Y, Yoshimura N, Muraki S, Yamada H, Nagata K, Hashizume H, Takiguchi N, Minamide A, Oka H, Kawaguchi H, Nakamura K, Akune T, Yoshida M (2013) Associations between radiographic lumbar spinal stenosis and clinical symptoms in the general population: the Wakayama Spine Study. Osteoarthritis Cartilage 21(6):783–788. doi:10.1016/j.joca.2013.02.656

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Kim HJ, Park JY, Kang KT, Chang BS, Lee CK, Yeom JS (2015) Factors influencing the surgical decision for the treatment of degenerative lumbar stenosis in a preference-based shared decision-making process. Eur Spine J 24(2):339–347. doi:10.1007/s00586-014-3441-5

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of interest

None.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to C. Schizas.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Laudato, P.A., Kulik, G. & Schizas, C. Relationship between sedimentation sign and morphological grade in symptomatic lumbar spinal stenosis. Eur Spine J 24, 2264–2268 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-015-4021-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00586-015-4021-z

Keywords

Navigation