• Eur Spine J · Oct 2019

    Review

    Measuring and reporting of vertebral endplate bone marrow lesions as seen on MRI (Modic changes): recommendations from the ISSLS Degenerative Spinal Phenotypes Group.

    • Aaron J Fields, Michele C Battié, Richard J Herzog, Jeffrey G Jarvik, Roland Krug, Thomas M Link, Jeffrey C Lotz, Conor W O'Neill, Aseem Sharma, and ISSLS Degenerative Spinal Phenotypes Group.
    • Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of California, 513 Parnassus Avenue, S-1161, Box 0514, San Francisco, CA, 94143-0514, USA. aaron.fields@ucsf.edu.
    • Eur Spine J. 2019 Oct 1; 28 (10): 2266-2274.

    PurposeThe positive association between low back pain and MRI evidence of vertebral endplate bone marrow lesions, often called Modic changes (MC), offers the exciting prospect of diagnosing a specific phenotype of chronic low back pain (LBP). However, imprecision in the reporting of MC has introduced substantial challenges, as variations in both imaging equipment and scanning parameters can impact conspicuity of MC. This review discusses key methodological factors that impact MC classification and recommends guidelines for more consistent MC reporting that will allow for better integration of research into this LBP phenotype.MethodsNon-systematic literature review.ResultsThe high diagnostic specificity of MC classification for a painful level contributes to the significant association observed between MC and LBP, whereas low and variable sensitivity underlies the between- and within-study variability in observed associations. Poor sensitivity may be owing to the presence of other pain generators, to the limited MRI resolution, and to the imperfect reliability of MC classification, which lowers diagnostic sensitivity and thus influences the association between MC and LBP. Importantly, magnetic field strength and pulse sequence parameters also impact detection of MC. Advances in pulse sequences may improve reliability and prove valuable for quantifying lesion severity.ConclusionsComparison of MC data between studies can be problematic. Various methodological factors impact detection and classification of MC, and the lack of reporting guidelines hinders interpretation and comparison of findings. Thus, it is critical to adopt imaging and reporting standards that codify acceptable methodological criteria. These slides can be retrieved under Electronic Supplementary Material.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…

Want more great medical articles?

Keep up to date with a free trial of metajournal, personalized for your practice.
1,624,503 articles already indexed!

We guarantee your privacy. Your email address will not be shared.