Cohen Steven P, Larkin Thomas M, Barna Steven A, Palmer William E, Hecht Andrew C, Stojanovic Milan P
Pain Management Center, Johns Hopkins Medical Institutions, Baltimore, MD 21205, USA.
Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2005 Mar-Apr;30(2):163-83. doi: 10.1016/j.rapm.2004.10.006.
Since its advent more than 50 years ago, the use of discography has been mired in controversy. The purpose of this review is to provide a clinical overview of lumbar discography and discogenic back pain, with special emphasis on determining the accuracy of discography and whether or not the procedure improves outcomes for surgery.
Material for this review was obtained from a MEDLINE search conducted from 1951 thru September 2004, bibliographic references, book chapters, and conference proceedings.
Based on a large number of comparative studies, plain discography is less accurate than magnetic resonance imaging in diagnosing lumbar herniated nucleus pulposus and comparable or slightly more sensitive in detecting degenerative disc disease. For disc degeneration, CT discography remains the gold standard for diagnosis. There are very few studies comparing surgical outcomes between patients who have undergone preoperative provocative discography and those who have not. What little evidence exists is conflicting. Before disc replacement surgery, approximately half the studies have used preoperative discography. A comparison of outcomes did not reveal any significant difference between the 2 groups but none of the studies was controlled, and they used different outcome measures, follow-up periods, and surgical techniques. Because all intradiscal electrothermal therapy (IDET) studies have used discography before surgery, no conclusions can be drawn regarding its effects on outcome.
Although discography, especially combined with CT scanning, may be more accurate than other radiologic studies in detecting degenerative disc disease, its ability to improve surgical outcomes has yet to be proven. In the United States and Europe, there are inconsistencies in the use of lumbar discography such that it is routinely used before IDET, yet only occasionally used before spinal fusion.
自50多年前问世以来,椎间盘造影术的应用一直备受争议。本综述的目的是对腰椎间盘造影术和椎间盘源性背痛进行临床概述,特别强调确定椎间盘造影术的准确性以及该操作是否能改善手术效果。
本综述的资料来源于1951年至2004年9月进行的MEDLINE检索、参考文献、书籍章节和会议论文集。
基于大量的对比研究,普通椎间盘造影术在诊断腰椎间盘突出症方面不如磁共振成像准确,在检测椎间盘退变方面与之相当或稍敏感一些。对于椎间盘退变,CT椎间盘造影术仍是诊断的金标准。很少有研究比较术前进行激发性椎间盘造影术的患者与未进行该操作的患者的手术效果。现有的少量证据相互矛盾。在椎间盘置换手术前,约一半的研究使用了术前椎间盘造影术。结果比较未显示两组之间有任何显著差异,但所有研究均未设对照,且它们使用了不同的结局指标、随访期和手术技术。由于所有椎间盘内电热疗法(IDET)研究均在手术前使用了椎间盘造影术,因此无法得出关于其对手术效果影响的结论。
尽管椎间盘造影术,尤其是与CT扫描相结合时,在检测椎间盘退变方面可能比其他放射学检查更准确,但其改善手术效果的能力尚未得到证实。在美国和欧洲,腰椎间盘造影术的使用存在不一致的情况,即在IDET前常规使用,而在脊柱融合术前仅偶尔使用。