An Analysis on Reliability of the Lee and Wildermuth Magnetic Resonance Imaging Grading Systems for Lumbar Neural Foraminal Stenosis
Article Sidebar
Views | PDF/EPUB Downloads:
21
/ 3
/ 2
Main Article Content
Abstract
Background: There is no uniformly accepted magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) grading system existing for lumbar neural
foraminal stenosis (LNFS). Radiologists’ reporting on neural foramen stenosis is qualitative and subjective. There are two grading systems proposed by Lee and Wildermuth.
Aims: To evaluate the reliability between Lee and Wildermuth grading systems for lumbar foraminal stenosis and analyze their relative merits.
Settings and Design: A retrospective, cross-sectional analytical study.
Materials and Methods: A total of 136 consecutive patients (63 males and 73 females; mean age 56.3 years) aged above 40 years with low backache found to have degenerative disc disease after MRI of the lumbar spine at a tertiary care hospital in South India from July to September 2015. Two general radiologists reviewed the MRI studies independently for the presence and grading of stenosis at L3/4, L4/5, and L5/S1 neural foramina. They graded neural foramen stenosis with Lee and Wildermuth systems at different occasions and were blinded to all previous grading.
Statistical Analysis Used: Interobserver agreement between the radiologists and intraobserver agreement by one radiologist for one system each were analyzed using kappa statistics.
Results: Wildermuth system of LNFS showed substantially higher inter- and intra-observer agreements than Lee system. Overall inter-rater and intra-rater agreements (κ) for Wildermuth system are 0.700 and 0.762, respectively, and that of Lee system are 0.394 and 0.702.
Conclusions: Wildermuth system is more reliable than Lee system for general radiologists. It also accounts slight neural foramen stenosis without perineural fat obliteration unlike in Lee system.
Downloads
Article Details
Section
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
This is an open access journal, and articles are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as appropriate credit is given and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms.
How to Cite
References
1. Lee S, Lee JW, Yeom JS, Kim KJ, Kim HJ, Chung SK, et al. A practical MRI grading system for lumbar foraminal stenosis. AJR Am J
Roentgenol 2010;194:1095‑8.
2. Wildermuth S, Zanetti M, Duewell S, Schmid MR, Romanowski B, Benini A, et al. Lumbar spine: Quantitative and qualitative
assessment of positional (upright flexion and extension) MR imaging and myelography. Radiology 1998;207:391‑8.
3. Sim J, Wright CC. The kappa statistic in reliability studies: Use, interpretation, and sample size requirements. Phys Ther 2005; 85:257‑68.
4. Jenis LG, An HS. Spine update. Lumbar foraminal stenosis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2000;25:389‑94.
5. Park HJ, Kim SS, Lee SY, Park NH, Rho MH, Hong HP, et al. Clinical correlation of a new MR imaging method for assessing lumbar
foraminal stenosis. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2012;33:818‑22.
6. Inufusa A, An HS, Lim TH, Hasegawa T, Haughton VM, Nowicki BH. Anatomic changes of the spinal canal and intervertebral foramen associated with flexion‑extension movement. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1996;21:2412‑20.