Article

The Accuracy of the Physical Examination for the Diagnosis of Midlumbar and Low Lumbar Nerve Root Impingement

Division of Research, New England Baptist Hospital, Boston, MA, USA.
Spine (Impact Factor: 2.45). 01/2011; 36(1):63-73. DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e3181c953cc
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Cross-sectional study with prospective recruitment. OBJECTIVE.: To determine the accuracy of the physical examination for the diagnosis of midlumbar nerve root impingement (L2, L3, or L4), low lumbar nerve root impingement (L5 or S1) and level-specific lumbar nerve root impingement on magnetic resonance imaging, using individual tests and combinations of tests.
The sensitivity and specificity of the physical examination for the localization of nerve root impingement has not been previously studied.
Sensitivities, specificities, and likelihood ratios (LRs) were calculated for the ability of individual tests and test combinations to predict the presence or absence of nerve root impingement at midlumbar, low lumbar, and specific nerve root levels.
LRs ≥5.0 indicate moderate to large changes from pre-test probability of nerve root impingement to post-test probability. For the diagnosis of midlumbar impingement, the femoral stretch test (FST), crossed FST, medial ankle pinprick sensation, and patellar reflex testing demonstrated LRs ≥5.0 (LR ∞). LRs ≥5.0 were observed with the combinations of FST and either patellar reflex testing (LR 7.0; 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.3-21) or the sit-to-stand test (LR ∞). For the diagnosis of low lumbar impingement, the Achilles reflex test demonstrated an LR ≥5.0 (LR 7.1; 95% CI 0.96-53); test combinations did not increase LRs. For the diagnosis of level-specific impingement, LRs ≥5.0 were observed for anterior thigh sensation at L2 (LR 13; 95% CI 1.8-87); FST at L3 (LR 5.7; 95% CI 2.3-4.4); patellar reflex testing (LR 7.7; 95% CI 1.7-35), medial ankle sensation (LR ∞), or crossed FST (LR 13; 95% CI 1.8-87) at L4; and hip abductor strength at L5 (LR 11; 95% CI 1.3-84). Test combinations increased LRs for level-specific root impingement at the L4 level only.
Individual physical examination tests may provide clinical information that substantially alters the likelihood that midlumbar impingement, low lumbar impingement, or level-specific impingement is present. Test combinations improve diagnostic accuracy for midlum-bar impingement.

0 Followers
 · 
154 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: introduction. There are difficulties in objective evaluation of activity of the muscles in the lower extremities of patients after successful treatment of sciatica and pseudosciatica, when no clear clinical symptoms are detected. However, the existence of some muscle dysfunction can be hypothesised and its detection was the aim of the study. objective. Recordings from chosen lower extremity muscles during standing were performed as supplementary differential diagnosis in evaluation of these patients. EMG in standing positions constitutes a new methodological approach not described in detail. methods. Twenty patients (11 after sciatica and 9 after sciatica-like episodes) were enrolled into the study. On the day of examination, clinical and electroneurographical (ENG; M and F waves tests) studies showed no pathology. The percentage of maximal voluntary contraction (MVC) defined muscle activity during standing. Mean amplitude and number of changes in muscle activity (fluctuations) were measured in surface electromyography recordings (sEMG) during normal standing and tandem positions. results and conclusions. Activity of proximal lower extremity muscles expressed as percentage of MVC was bilaterally increased in patients after sciatica in normal standing position, compared with results from the group of healthy volunteers (N=9). Patients after sciatica were also characterized with a significant increase of mean sEMG amplitude, recorded especially in distal muscles on the affected side during tandem position. This pathological change was related to decrease in 'fluctuations' frequency in patients after sciatica (P<0.001) more than after pseudosciatica (P<0.01) groups in both standing positions, compared to parameters of healthy volunteers. Sciatica and pseudosciatica in anamnesis cause different abnormal patterns of lower extremity muscle activity during standing positions when recorded with surface EMG.
    Annals of agricultural and environmental medicine: AAEM 06/2014; 21(2):375-381. DOI:10.5604/1232-1966.1108608 · 3.06 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: We need to overcome limitations of present assessment and also integrate newer research in our work about sciatica. Inflammation induces changes in the DRG and nerve root. It sensitizes the axons. Nociceptor is a unique axon. It is pseudo unipolar: both its ends, central and peripheral, behave in similar fashion. The nerve in periphery which carries these axons may selectively become sensitive to mechanical pressure--"mechanosensitized," as we coin the phrase. Many pain questionnaires are used and are effective in identifying neuropathic pain solely on basis of descriptors but they do not directly physically correlate nerve root and pain. A thorough neurological evaluation is always needed. Physical examination is not direct pain assessment but testing mobility of nerve root and its effect on pain generation. There is a dogmatic dominance of dermatomes in assessment of leg pain. They are unreliable. Images may not correlate with symptoms and pathology in about 28% of cases. Electrophysiology may be normal in purely inflamed nerve root. Palpation may help in such inflammatory setting to refine our assessment further. Confirmation of sciatica is done by selective nerve root block (SNRB) today but it is fraught with several complications and needs elaborate inpatient and operating room set up. We have used the unique property of the pseudo unipolar axon that both its ends have similar functional properties and so inject along its peripheral end sodium channel blockers to block the basic cause of the mechanosensitization namely upregulated sodium channels in the root or DRG. Thus using palpation we may be able to detect symptomatic nerve in stage of inflammation and with distal end injection, along same inflamed nerve we may be able to abolish and so confirm sciatica. Discussions of sciatica pain diagnosis tend to immediately shift and centre on the affected disc rather than the nerve. Theoretically it may be possible to detect the affected nerve by palpating the nerve and relieve pain moment we desensitize the nerve.
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Study Design. The application of complex neurophysiological examination including motor evoked potentials (MEP) for pre- and postoperative evaluation of patients suffering from acute sciatica.Objective. The assessment of sensitivity and specificity of needle electromyography (EMG), MEP and H-reflex examinations. The comparative analysis of preoperative and postoperative neurophysiological examination.Summary and Background Data. In spite of the fact that complex neurophysiological diagnostic tools seem to be important for interpretation of incompatible results of neuroimaging and clinical examination, especially in the patients qualified for surgical treatment, their application has never been completely analysed and documented.Methods. Pre- and postoperative EMG, electroneurography (ENG), F-waves, H-reflex and MEP examination were performed in 23 patients with confirmed disc-root conflict at lumbo-sacral spine. Clinical evaluation included examination of sensory perception for L5-S1 dermatomes, muscles strength with Lovett's scale, deep tendon reflexes, pain intensity with visual analogue scale (VAS) and straight leg raising test (SLR).Results. Sensitivity of EMG at rest and MEP examination for evaluation of L5-S1 roots injury was 22-63% and 31-56% while specificity was 71-83% and 57%-86%, respectively. H-reflex sensitivity and specificity for evaluation of S1 root injury were 56% and 67%, respectively. A significant improvement of root latency parameter in postoperative MEP studies as compared to preoperative was recorded for L5 (p = 0.039) and S1 root's levels (p = 0.05).Conclusions. The analysis of the results from neurophysiological tests together with neuroimaging and clinical examination allow for a precise preoperative indication of the lumbosacral roots injury and accurate postoperative evaluation of patients suffering from sciatica.
    Spine 07/2014; 39(21). DOI:10.1097/BRS.0000000000000510 · 2.45 Impact Factor

Preview

Download
1 Download
Available from