J Korean Orthop Assoc.  1975 Sep;10(3):241-246. 10.4055/jkoa.1975.10.3.241.

Clinical Evaluation of Mylegraphy in Orthopedic Field: Correlative Study of Myelogram with Clinical and Operative Findings in Lumbar Disc Lesions

• Lee HK
• Kim SK
• Yang YS

• KMID: 2471422
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.4055/jkoa.1975.10.3.241

Abstract

Since Walter Dandy pointed out the beneficial use of air for roentgenologic visualization of spinal canal in 1919, numerous contrast media have been proposed to improve their specificity for the diagnosis of intraspinal pathology. It took nearly thirty years, however, until Pantopaque was adopted as a contrast material by Unive. rsity of Rochester group in 1944. to have been rapidly popularized mainly because of its lower viscosity and less toxicity. In addition, its ability to delineate much finer structures, such as root sleeves, and the property that is easily removable by gentle aspiration promoted its acceptability. Generally, in orthopedic practice, the indication of myelography is rather limited to those instances where 1) clinical diagnosis is in doubt, or 2) other intraspinal lesion is suspected. In other words, my myelography is appreciated for clarifying the exact localization of disc lesions and/or to rule out pathologies of other nature, i.e., intraspinal tumor. In recent years, the authors have performed myelography with same indications as mentioned above. Twelve cases with several confusing manifestations were selected among 87 patients admitted under the impression of H.I.V.D. to Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Seoul National University Hospital during the past 2 years. We are submitting analysis on these cases to correlate myelographic findings with clinical and subsequent operative findings. With these results the authors believe that myelography is a valuable aid in the diagnosis of lumbar disc lesions and the decisive factor in borderline cases.

MeSH Terms

Contrast Media
Diagnosis
Humans
Iophendylate
Myelography
Orthopedics*
Pathology
Sensitivity and Specificity
Seoul
Spinal Canal
Viscosity
Contrast Media
Iophendylate

Reference

1.Braey L. P.Parker, B.; & Vaughan,. J. : An evaluation of the electromyogram in the diagnosis of the lumbar disc lesions. J.B.J.S. 51-A:539. 1967.

2.Crenshaw A. H.Campbell's operative orthopedics, 5th. edition, 1971. The C. V. Mosby Company.

3.Edgar M. A.., Park M. W.Induced pain patterns on passive straight leg raising in low lumbar disc protrusion. A prospective clinical, myélographie and operative study in fifty patients. J. J. B. f. S. 56-B:658. 1974.

4.Finneson B. E.Low back pain. J. B. Lippincott Company, Philadelphia. Toronto.1975.

5.Ford L. T.., Ramsey R. H.., Holt E. P.., Key J. A.An analysis of one hundred consecutive lumbar myelograms followed by disc operations for relief of low back pain and sciatica. Surgery. 32:152. 1952.

6.Hudgins W. R.The predictive value of myelography in the diagnosis of ruptured lumbar discs. J. Neurosurg. 32:961. 1970.

7.Lansche W. E.., Ford L. T.Correlation of the myelogram with clinical and operative findings in lumbar disc lestons. J. B. J. S. 42-A:193. 1960.

8.Rothman R. H.., Campbell R. E.., Menko-witz E.Myelographie patterns in lumbar disk degeneration. Clinical Orthopedics & Related Research. 99:18. 1970.

9.Scoville W. B.., Moretz W. H.., Harkins W. D.Discrepancies in myelography. Surgery, Gyne. & Obstet. 86:559. 1948.

10.Stinchfield F. E.., Cruess R. L.Indications for spine fusion in conjunction with removal of herniated nucleus pulposus, Instructional Course Lectures. Vol. XVIII:42. 1961.

11.Taveras J.M.., Wood E. H.Diagnostic neuroradiology, Baltimore. 1964. The Williams and Wilkins Company.