International Clinical Neuroscience Journal

Vol. 2 No. 1 (2015)

Agreement of electrodiagnosis, clinical findings and MRI in patients with low back pain

International Clinical Neuroscience Journal, Vol. 2 No. 1 (2015), 3 March 2015 , Page 26-32
https://doi.org/10.22037/icnj.v2i1.8137

Abstract

Background and Purpose: Disc herniation leading to radiculopathy is one of the important differential diagnosis of low back pain which needs specific medical care. Radiculopathies can be initially diagnosed by history taking and physical examination. However role of other diagnostic methods like Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and Electromyography (EMG) in narrowing differential diagnosis is warranted when clinical data are inconsistent or inadequate. In this study we evaluated level of agreements among three methods of radiculopathy diagnosis including EMG, MRI and physical exam.

Methods: This study is a comparative cross sectional study on 384 patients which was performed among patients who were referred to electrodiagnosis center for their back pain. Results from 3 questionnaires that filled by neurosurgeon for clinical results, radiologist for MRI findings and neurologist for electrodiagnosis findings were psychometrically analyzed using Kappa index for agreement among three methods.

Results: From the 384 cases studied, MRI were successful in 90.6% (348 cases) to identify radiculopathy and EMG and clinic with 76.6% (295 cases) and 70.5% (286 patients), respectively. EMG andMRI have agreed in 76.8% of cases in the diagnosis of radiculopathy. MRI and clinical data in 69.7% of cases (Pvalue<0.940) and EMG and clinical data in 62.7% of cases (Pvalue< 0.843) have agreed but they were not statistically significant.

Conclusion: Study results show that MRI is the best diagnostic tool for evaluating the presence of radiculopathy but EMG could also be used instead of MRI in radiculopathy diagnosis. Since EMG is more invasive than MRI, EMG is better to be considered as a second diagnostic tool.

Keywords:
  • Electrodiagnosis
  • Physical Examination
  • Back Pain
  • Magnetic Resonance Imaging

How to Cite

1.
Hosseininezhad M, Hatamian H, Alizadeh A, Firozkohi B, Yousefzadeh S, Bakhshayesh B, Hajebrahimi M. Agreement of electrodiagnosis, clinical findings and MRI in patients with low back pain. Int Clin Neurosci J [Internet]. 2015 Feb. 26 [cited 2024 Oct. 15];2(1):26-32. Available from: https://journals.sbmu.ac.ir/neuroscience/article/view/8137

References

Andersson GB. Epidemiological features of chronic low-back pain. Lancet. 1999 Aug 14;354(9178):581-5.

Tarulli AW, Raynor EM. Lumbosacral radiculopathy. Neurol Clin. 2007 May;25(2):387-405.

Nardin RA, Patel MR, Gudas TF, Rutkove SB, Raynor EM. Electromyography and magnetic resonance imaging in the evaluation of radiculopathy. Muscle Nerve. 1999 Feb;22(2):151-5.

Reza Soltani Z, Sajadi S, Tavana B. A comparison of magnetic resonance imaging with electrodiagnostic findings in the evaluation of clinical radiculopathy: a cross-sectional study. Eur Spine J. 2014 Apr;23(4):916-21.

Chou R, Qaseem A, Snow V, Casey D, Cross JT, Jr., Shekelle P, et al. Diagnosis and treatment of low back pain: a joint clinical practice guideline from the American College of Physicians and the American Pain Society. Ann Intern Med. Oct 2;147(7):478-91.

Golob AL, Wipf JE. Low back pain. The Medical clinics of North America. 2014 May;98(3):405-28.

Jarvik JG, Deyo RA. Diagnostic evaluation of low back pain with emphasis on imaging. Ann Intern Med. 2002 Oct 1;137(7):586-97.

van der Windt DA, Simons E, Riphagen, II, Ammendolia C, Verhagen AP, Laslett M, et al. Physical examination for lumbar radiculopathy due to disc herniation in patients with low-back pain. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010 (2):CD007431.

Barr K. Electrodiagnosis of lumbar radiculopathy. Phys Med Rehabil Clin N Am. 2013 Feb;24(1):79-91.

Matsui H, Kanamori M, Kawaguchi Y, Kitagawa H, Nakamura H, Tsuji H. Clinical and electrophysiologic characteristics of compressed lumbar nerve roots. Spine. 1997 Sep 15;22(18):2100-5.

Ryan AG, Morrissey BM, Newcombe RG, Halpin SF, Hourihan MD. Are T1 weighted images helpful in MRI of cervical radiculopathy? Br J Radiol. 2004 Mar;77(915):189-96.

Sander HW, Chokroverty S. Diabetic amyotrophy: current concepts. Semin Neurol. 1996 Jun;16(2):173-8.

Mulford GJ, Cohen SJ. The role of electrodiagnosis in the evaluation of low back pain. Clin Occup Environ Med. 2006;5(3):591-613, vi.

Bartynski WS, Petropoulou KA. The MR imaging features and clinical correlates in low back pain-related syndromes. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am. 2007 May;15(2):137-54, v.

Lee JH, Lee SH. Physical examination, magnetic resonance image, and electrodiagnostic study in patients with lumbosacral disc herniation or spinal stenosis. J Rehabil Med. 2012 Oct;44(10):845-50.

Chiodo A, Haig AJ, Yamakawa KS, Quint D, Tong H, Choksi VR. Needle EMG has a lower false positive rate than MRI in asymptomatic older adults being evaluated for lumbar spinal stenosis. Clin Neurophysiol. 2007 Apr;118(4):751-6.

Czyrny JJ, Lawrence J. The importance of paraspinal muscle EMG in cervical and lumbosacral radiculopathy: review of 100 cases. Electromyogr Clin Neurophysiol. 1996 Dec;36(8):503-8.

  • Abstract Viewed: 432 times
  • PDF Downloaded: 346 times

Download Statastics