1. ZHAW digitalcollection
  2. Gesundheit
  3. Publikationen
  4. Publikationen Gesundheit
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorBarz, Thomas-
dc.contributor.authorStaub, Lukas P.-
dc.contributor.authorMelloh, Markus-
dc.contributor.authorHamann, Gregor-
dc.contributor.authorLord, Sarah J.-
dc.contributor.authorChatfield, Mark D.-
dc.contributor.authorBossuyt, Patrick M.-
dc.contributor.authorLange, Joern-
dc.contributor.authorMerk, Harry R.-
dc.date.accessioned2018-02-05T09:40:11Z-
dc.date.available2018-02-05T09:40:11Z-
dc.date.issued2014-
dc.identifier.issn1529-9430de_CH
dc.identifier.issn1878-1632de_CH
dc.identifier.urihttps://digitalcollection.zhaw.ch/handle/11475/2578-
dc.description.abstractBackground context: The nerve root sedimentation sign in transverse magnetic resonance imaging has been shown to discriminate well between selected patients with and without lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS), but the performance of this new test, when used in a broader patient population, is not yet known. Purpose: To evaluate the clinical performance of the nerve root sedimentation sign in detecting central LSS above L5 and to determine its potential significance for treatment decisions. Study design: Retrospective cohort study. Patient sample: One hundred eighteen consecutive patients with suspected LSS (52% women, median age 62 years) with a median follow-up of 24 months. Outcome measures: Oswestry disability index (ODI) and back and leg pain relief. Methods: We performed a clinical test validation study to assess the clinical performance of the sign by measuring its association with health outcomes. Subjects were patients referred to our orthopedic spine unit from 2004 to 2007 before the sign had been described. Based on clinical and radiological diagnostics, patients had been treated with decompression surgery or nonsurgical treatment. Changes in the ODI and pain from baseline to 24-month follow-up were compared between sedimentation sign positives and negatives in both treatment groups. Results: Sixty-nine patients underwent surgery. Average baseline ODI in the surgical group was 54.7%, and the sign was positive in 39 patients (mean ODI improvement 29.0 points) and negative in 30 (ODI improvement 28.4), with no statistically significant difference in ODI and pain improvement between groups. In the 49 patients of the nonsurgical group, mean baseline ODI was 42.4%; the sign was positive in 18 (ODI improvement 0.6) and negative in 31 (ODI improvement 17.7). A positive sign was associated with a smaller ODI and back pain improvement than negative signs (both p<.01 on t test). Conclusions: In patients commonly treated with decompression surgery, the sedimentation sign does not appear to predict surgical outcome. In nonsurgically treated patients, a positive sign is associated with more limited improvement. In these cases, surgery might be effective, but this needs investigation in prospective randomized trials (Australian New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry, number ACTRN12610000567022).de_CH
dc.language.isoende_CH
dc.publisherElsevierde_CH
dc.relation.ispartofThe Spine Journalde_CH
dc.rightsLicence according to publishing contractde_CH
dc.subjectLumbar spinal stenosisde_CH
dc.subjectDiagnostic testde_CH
dc.subjectSensitivity and specificityde_CH
dc.subjectDiagnostic imagingde_CH
dc.subjectNerve root sedimentationde_CH
dc.subject.ddc616.7: Krankheiten des Bewegungsapparates und Orthopädiede_CH
dc.subject.ddc617.5: Orthopädische Chirurgiede_CH
dc.titleClinical validity of the nerve root sedimentation sign in patients with suspected lumbar spinal stenosisde_CH
dc.typeBeitrag in wissenschaftlicher Zeitschriftde_CH
dcterms.typeTextde_CH
zhaw.departementGesundheitde_CH
zhaw.organisationalunitInstitut für Public Health (IPH)de_CH
zhaw.publisher.placeAmsterdamde_CH
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.spinee.2013.06.105de_CH
zhaw.funding.euNode_CH
zhaw.issue4de_CH
zhaw.originated.zhawYesde_CH
zhaw.pages.end674de_CH
zhaw.pages.start667de_CH
zhaw.publication.statuspublishedVersionde_CH
zhaw.volume14de_CH
zhaw.publication.reviewPeer review (Publikation)de_CH
Appears in collections:Publikationen Gesundheit

Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.
Show simple item record
Barz, T., Staub, L. P., Melloh, M., Hamann, G., Lord, S. J., Chatfield, M. D., Bossuyt, P. M., Lange, J., & Merk, H. R. (2014). Clinical validity of the nerve root sedimentation sign in patients with suspected lumbar spinal stenosis. The Spine Journal, 14(4), 667–674. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spinee.2013.06.105
Barz, T. et al. (2014) ‘Clinical validity of the nerve root sedimentation sign in patients with suspected lumbar spinal stenosis’, The Spine Journal, 14(4), pp. 667–674. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spinee.2013.06.105.
T. Barz et al., “Clinical validity of the nerve root sedimentation sign in patients with suspected lumbar spinal stenosis,” The Spine Journal, vol. 14, no. 4, pp. 667–674, 2014, doi: 10.1016/j.spinee.2013.06.105.
BARZ, Thomas, Lukas P. STAUB, Markus MELLOH, Gregor HAMANN, Sarah J. LORD, Mark D. CHATFIELD, Patrick M. BOSSUYT, Joern LANGE und Harry R. MERK, 2014. Clinical validity of the nerve root sedimentation sign in patients with suspected lumbar spinal stenosis. The Spine Journal. 2014. Bd. 14, Nr. 4, S. 667–674. DOI 10.1016/j.spinee.2013.06.105
Barz, Thomas, Lukas P. Staub, Markus Melloh, Gregor Hamann, Sarah J. Lord, Mark D. Chatfield, Patrick M. Bossuyt, Joern Lange, and Harry R. Merk. 2014. “Clinical Validity of the Nerve Root Sedimentation Sign in Patients with Suspected Lumbar Spinal Stenosis.” The Spine Journal 14 (4): 667–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spinee.2013.06.105.
Barz, Thomas, et al. “Clinical Validity of the Nerve Root Sedimentation Sign in Patients with Suspected Lumbar Spinal Stenosis.” The Spine Journal, vol. 14, no. 4, 2014, pp. 667–74, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spinee.2013.06.105.


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.