Guyer Richard D, Ohnmeiss Donna D
Texas Back Institute, 6300 W. Parker Road, Plano, TX 75093-8100, USA.
Spine J. 2003 May-Jun;3(3 Suppl):11S-27S. doi: 10.1016/s1529-9430(02)00563-6.
A comprehensive review of the literature dealing with lumbar discography was conducted.
The purpose of the review is to update the North American Spine Society position statement published in 1994 that addressed criticisms of lumbar discography, to identify indications for
Lumbar discography remains a controversial diagnostic procedure. There are concerns about its safety and clinical value, although many support its use in specific applications.
Articles dealing with lumbar discography were reviewed and are summarized in this report.
Most of the recent literature supports the use of discography in selected patients. Although not to be taken lightly, many of the serious complications and high complication rates reported before 1970 have decreased since then because of improvement in injection technique, imaging and contrast materials.
Most of the current literature supports the use of discography in select situations. Indications for discography include, but are not limited to: (1) Further evaluation of demonstrably abnormal discs to help assess the extent of abnormality or correlation of the abnormality with the clinical symptoms. Such symptoms may include recurrent pain from a previously operated disc and lateral disc herniation. (2) Patients with persistent, severe symptoms in whom other diagnostic tests have failed to reveal clear confirmation of a suspected disc as the source of pain. (3) Assessment of patients who have failed to respond to surgical intervention to determine if there is painful pseudarthrosis or a symptomatic disc in a posteriorly fused segment and to help evaluate possible recurrent disc herniation. (4) Assessment of discs before fusion to determine if the discs within the proposed fusion segment are symptomatic and to determine if discs adjacent to this segment are normal. (5) Assessment of candidates for minimally invasive surgical intervention to confirm a contained disc herniation or to investigate dye distribution pattern before chemonucleolysis or percutaneous procedures. Lumbar discography should be performed by those well experienced with the procedure and in sterile conditions with a double-needle technique and fluoroscopic imaging for proper needle placement. Information assessed and recorded should include the volume of contrast injected, pain response, with particular emphasis on its locations and similarity to clinical symptoms, and the pattern of dye distribution. Frequently, discography is followed by axial computed tomography scanning to obtain more information about the condition of the disc.
对有关腰椎间盘造影术的文献进行了全面综述。
本综述的目的是更新北美脊柱协会1994年发表的立场声明,该声明回应了对腰椎间盘造影术的批评,确定其适应证。
腰椎间盘造影术仍然是一种有争议的诊断方法。尽管许多人支持其在特定应用中的使用,但人们对其安全性和临床价值仍存在担忧。
对有关腰椎间盘造影术的文章进行了综述,并在本报告中进行了总结。
最近的大多数文献支持在选定患者中使用椎间盘造影术。尽管不可轻视,但由于注射技术、成像和造影剂的改进,1970年以前报道的许多严重并发症和高并发症发生率自那时以来有所下降。
当前的大多数文献支持在特定情况下使用椎间盘造影术。椎间盘造影术的适应证包括但不限于:(1)对明显异常的椎间盘进行进一步评估,以帮助评估异常程度或异常与临床症状的相关性。此类症状可能包括先前手术椎间盘的复发性疼痛和外侧椎间盘突出。(2)其他诊断测试未能明确证实疑似椎间盘为疼痛来源的持续性、严重症状患者。(3)对手术干预无反应的患者进行评估,以确定后融合节段是否存在疼痛性假关节或有症状的椎间盘,并帮助评估可能的复发性椎间盘突出。(4)在融合术前对椎间盘进行评估,以确定拟融合节段内的椎间盘是否有症状,并确定该节段相邻的椎间盘是否正常。(5)对微创外科手术干预的候选者进行评估,以确认包容性椎间盘突出或在化学髓核溶解术或经皮手术前研究染料分布模式。腰椎间盘造影术应由对此操作经验丰富的人员在无菌条件下采用双针技术并使用荧光透视成像以正确放置针头来进行。评估和记录的信息应包括注入造影剂的量、疼痛反应,尤其要强调疼痛的部位及其与临床症状的相似性,以及染料分布模式。通常,椎间盘造影术后会进行轴向计算机断层扫描,以获取有关椎间盘状况的更多信息。