Associations between facet tropism and vertebral rotation in patients with degenerative lumbar disease

Lumbar spine fusion surgery versus best conservative care for patients with severe, persistent low back pain

Aims

People with severe, persistent low back pain (LBP) may be offered lumbar spine fusion surgery if they have had insufficient benefit from recommended non-surgical treatments. However, National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) 2016 guidelines recommended not offering spinal fusion surgery for adults with LBP, except as part of a randomized clinical trial. This survey aims to describe UK clinicians' views about the suitability of patients for such a future trial, along with their views regarding equipoise for randomizing patients in a future clinical trial comparing lumbar spine fusion surgery to best conservative care (BCC; the FORENSIC-UK trial).

Methods

An online cross-sectional survey was piloted by the multidisciplinary research team, then shared with clinical professional groups in the UK who are involved in the management of adults with severe, persistent LBP. The survey had seven sections that covered the demographic details of the clinician, five hypothetical case vignettes of patients with varying presentations, a series of questions regarding the preferred management, and whether or not each clinician would be willing to recruit the example patients into future clinical trials.

Results

There were 72 respondents, with a response rate of 9.0%. They comprised 39 orthopaedic spine surgeons, 17 neurosurgeons, one pain specialist, and 15 allied health professionals. Most respondents (n = 61,84.7%) chose conservative care as their first-choice management option for all five case vignettes. Over 50% of respondents reported willingness to randomize three of the five cases to either surgery or BCC, indicating a willingness to participate in the future randomized trial. From the respondents, transforaminal interbody fusion was the preferred approach for spinal fusion (n = 19, 36.4%), and the preferred method of BCC was a combined programme of physical and psychological therapy (n = 35, 48.5%).

Conclusion

This survey demonstrates that there is uncertainty about the role of lumbar spine fusion surgery and BCC for a range of example patients with severe, persistent LBP in the UK.

Semiautomatic Assessment of Facet Tropism From Lumbar Spine MRI Using Deep Learning: A Northern Finland Birth Cohort Study

STUDY DESIGN

This is a retrospective, cross-sectional, population-based study that automatically measured the facet joint (FJ) angles from T2-weighted axial magnetic resonance imagings (MRIs) of the lumbar spine using deep learning (DL).

OBJECTIVE

This work aimed to introduce a semiautomatic framework that measures the FJ angles using DL and study facet tropism (FT) in a large Finnish population-based cohort.

SUMMARY OF DATA

T2-weighted axial MRIs of the lumbar spine (L3/4 through L5/S1) for (n=1288) in the NFBC1966 Finnish population-based cohort were used for this study.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A DL model was developed and trained on 430 participants' MRI images. The authors computed FJ angles from the model's prediction for each level, that is, L3/4 through L5/S1, for the male and female subgroups. Inter-rater and intrarater reliability was analyzed for 60 participants using annotations made by two radiologists and a musculoskeletal researcher. With the developed method, we examined FT in the entire NFBC1966 cohort, adopting the literature definitions of FT thresholds at 7° and 10°. The rater agreement was evaluated both for the annotations and the FJ angles computed based on the annotations. FJ asymmetry ( - was used to evaluate the agreement and correlation between the raters. Bland-Altman analysis was used to assess the agreement and systemic bias in the FJ asymmetry. The authors used the Dice score as the metric to compare the annotations between the raters. The authors evaluated the model predictions on the independent test set and compared them against the ground truth annotations.

RESULTS

This model scored Dice (92.7±0.1) and intersection over union (87.1±0.2) aggregated across all the regions of interest, that is, vertebral body (VB), FJs, and posterior arch (PA). The mean FJ angles measured for the male and female subgroups were in agreement with the literature findings. Intrarater reliability was high, with a Dice score of VB (97.3), FJ (82.5), and PA (90.3). The inter-rater reliability was better between the radiologists with a Dice score of VB (96.4), FJ (75.5), and PA (85.8) than between the radiologists and the musculoskeletal researcher. The prevalence of FT was higher in the male subgroup, with L4/5 found to be the most affected region.

CONCLUSION

The authors developed a DL-based framework that enabled us to study FT in a large cohort. Using the proposed method, the authors present the prevalence of FT in a Finnish population-based cohort.

Prevalence, distribution characteristic and risk factors of lumbar vertebral axial rotation in patients with lumbar disc herniation: a retrospective study

This retrospective study aimed to investigate the impact of lumbar disc herniation (LDH) on vertebral axial rotation (VAR) in the lumbar spine, focusing on both close and distant neighboring vertebrae. A total of 516 patients with LDH and an equal number of healthy individuals were included in the study, matched for age and gender. The degree of axial rotation for each lumbar spine vertebra was assessed using the Nash-Moe index. The results revealed that the prevalence of VAR in the lumbar spine was significantly higher in the LDH group compared to the Control group (65.7% vs 46.7%, P < 0.001). Among the LDH group, the L2 vertebra had the highest frequency of VAR (49.5%), followed by L1 (45.1%), and then L3 to L5 (33.6%, 8.9%, 3.1%, respectively). A similar pattern was observed in the Control group (L2, 39.8%; L1, 34.6%; L3, 23.2%; L4, 3.1%; L5, 0.8%). Furthermore, the study found that disc herniation was associated with a higher incidence of VAR not only in close neighboring vertebrae but also in distant neighboring vertebrae. This indicates that the biomechanical influence of LDH extends beyond just the immediate adjacent vertebrae. To identify potential risk factors for VAR in LDH patients, multivariate analysis was performed. The results revealed that age was an independent risk factor for VAR (OR 1.022, 95% CI [1.011, 1.034], P < 0.001). However, the duration of symptoms and presence of back pain were not found to be significant risk factors for VAR.

Is there an anatomic basis for the different behavior of Lenke types 1AR and 1AL in idiopathic scoliosis? A study on facet joint tropism influence

INTRODUCTION

AIS type 1 Curves are sub-classified based on the tilt of L4 as 1AR and 1AL. These curves are different w.r.t their curve behavior, progression and level selection. Presently there is no known anatomic etiology for the different behavior. Facet tropism (FT) is defined as the asymmetry between the facet angle of the left and right facet joints. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the correlation between facet tropism in the lumbar segments and occurrence of type 1AR and 1AL curves in AIS patients.

METHODS

AIS patients with diagnosis of type 1 AR and 1AL right thoracic AIS curves who underwent posterior instrumented fusion were queried from a single institutions' database. Patients needed to have an MRI of their entire spine to be included. L2-3, L3-4 and L4-5 Facet angles (FA, angle made by the facet line with the mid-sagittal line at respected vertebral level) were calculated. FT was classified as follows: ≤ 5° (minimal), 6- 10° (mild) and ≥ 11° (severe). 1AR and 1AL curves were compared for FA, FT and FT grade at each lumbar segmental levels.

RESULTS

One hundred nineteen patients were included (77 females, mean age-13.85 years, mean BMI- 21.63, 73 1AL and 46 1AR). The mean thoracic Cobb was 52.5 ± 9.8°, thoracic kyphosis was 28.12 ± 12° and lumbar lordosis was 53.48 ± 12.6°. L3-4 FA on the right side was more coronally oriented in 1AR curves compared to 1AL curves (37° vs. 31°, p = 0.04). On comparing FT at each level, 1AR curves had a higher FT at L3-4 (1.5° vs. - 2.3°, p = 0.01) and L4-5 levels (5.8° vs. - 0.28°, p < 0.001) compared to 1AL patients. Similarly, 1AR patients had significantly more patients with severe FT at L3-4 (34.8% vs. 13.7%, p = 0.02) and at L4-5 (17.3% vs. 6.8%, p = 0.01) compared to 1ALcurves.

CONCLUSION

L3-4 joints are more coronally oriented in 1AR curves compared to 1AL curves. 1AR patients displayed higher FT at L3-4 and L4-5 compared to 1AL patients. 1AR curves also reveal a higher percentage of severe FT at L3-4 and L4-5 levels. This may influence the curve behavior and progression in these two curve types.

Abnormal L5-S1 Facet Joint Orientation as a Harbinger of Degenerative Spondylolisthesis: A Case Report

Degenerative spondylolisthesis is a common cause of low back pain and resultant disability in the adult population. The causes of degenerative spondylolisthesis are not entirely understood, though a combination of anatomic and lifestyle factors likely contributes to the development of this pathology. Here, we report a case of a 38-year-old female presenting with low back pain and right lower extremity radiculopathy, found to have degenerative L5-S1 spondylolisthesis, which we postulate developed in part due to the sagittal orientation of her L5-S1 facet joints bilaterally.