Download PDF
Semin Musculoskelet Radiol 2003; 7(4): 277-286
DOI: 10.1055/s-2004-815675
Copyright © 2002 by Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc., 333 Seventh Avenue, New York, NY 10001, USA. Tel.: +1(212) 584-4662

Magnetic Resonance Imaging of the Weight-Bearing Spine

Dominik Weishaupt, Larissa Boxheimer
  • Institute of Radiology, University Hospital, Zurich, Switzerland
Further Information

Publication History

Publication Date:
21 January 2004 (online)

Also available at
    Permissions and Reprints

ABSTRACT

Weight-bearing magnetic resonance (MR) imaging of the spine can either be simulated by imaging the patient in the supine position in combination with a special axial loading device or be achieved by using vertically open-configuration MR systems, which allow for in vivo MR images of the spine under upright weight-bearing conditions in either seated or standing body positions. Weight-bearing MRI of the spine permits the study of physiological as well as pathological changes in the relationships of the intervertebral disk, the spinal canal, and the neural foramina as well as the assessment of segmental instability in physiologic body positions. With this technique, MR images may be taken in painful body positions so that morphological changes of the intervertebral disk or other spinal structures may be correlated with pain or other symptoms. In selected cases, weight-bearing MRI of the spine may demonstrate clinically relevant neural compromise or foraminal stenosis, which may be occult on conventional MR images obtained in the supine position.

KEYWORDS

MR Imaging - spine - weight-bearing - axial load

REFERENCES

  • 1 Modic M T, Masaryk T J, Ross J S, Carter J R. Imaging of degenerative disk disease.  Radiology . 1988;  168 177-186
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Kent D L, Haynor D R, Longstreth Jr T W, Larson E B. The clinical efficacy of magnetic resonance imaging in neuroimaging.  Ann Intern Med . 1994;  120 856-871
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Porter R W, Hibbert C S, Wicks M. The spinal canal in symptomatic lumber disc lesions.  J Bone Joint Surg Br . 1978;  60-B 485-487
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Katz J N, Dalgas M, Stucki G. et al . Degenerative lumbar spinal stenosis. Diagnostic value of the history and physical examination.  Arthritis Rheum . 1995;  38 1236-1241
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Revel M, Mayoux-Benhamou M A, Aaron C, Amor B. Morphological variations of the lumbar foramina during flexion-extension and disk collapse.  Rev Rhum Mal Osteoartic . 1988;  55 361-366
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Mayoux-Benhamou M A, Revel M, Aaron C, Chomette G, Amor B. A morphometric study of the lumbar foramen. Influence of flexion-extension movements and of isolated disc collapse.  Surg Radiol Anat . 1989;  11 97-102
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Schonstrom N, Lindahl S, Willen J, Hansson T. Dynamic changes in the dimensions of the lumbar spinal canal: an experimental study in vitro.  J Orthop Res . 1989;  7 115-121
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Nowicki B H, Haughton V M, Schmidt T A. et al . Occult lumbar lateral spinal stenosis in neural foramina subjected to physiologic loading.  Am J Neuroradiol . 1996;  17 1605-1614
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Yoo J U, Zou D, Edwards W T, Bayley J, Yuan H A. Effect of cervical spine motion on the neuroforaminal dimensions of the human cervical spine.  Spine . 1992;  17 1131-1136
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Nowicki B H, Yu S, Reinartz J, Pintar F, Yoganandan N, Haughton V M. Effect of axial loading on neural foramina and nerve roots in the lumbar spine.  Radiology . 1990;  176 433-437
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Willen J, Danielson B, Gaulitz A, Niklason T, Schonstrom N, Hansson T. Dynamic effects on the lumbar spinal canal: axially loaded CT-myelography and MRI in patients with sciatica and/or neurogenic claudication.  Spine . 1997;  22 2968-2976
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Danielson B, Willen J. Axially loaded magnetic resonance image of the lumbar spine in asymptomatic individuals.  Spine . 2001;  26 2601-2606
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Wildermuth S, Zanetti M, Duewell S. et al . Lumbar spine: quantitative and qualitative assessment of positional (upright flexion and extension) MR imaging and myelography.  Radiology . 1998;  207 391-398
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Weishaupt D, Schmid M R, Zanetti M. et al . Positional MR imaging of the lumbar spine: does it demonstrate nerve root compromise not visible at conventional MR imaging?.  Radiology . 2000;  215 247-253
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Schmid M R, Stucki G, Duewell S, Wildermuth S, Romanowski B, Hodler J. Changes in cross-sectional measurements of the spinal canal and intervertebral foramina as a function of body position: in vivo studies on an open-configuration MR system.  Am J Roentgenol . 1999;  172 1095-1102
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Zamani A A, Moriarty T, Hsu L. et al . Functional MRI of the lumbar spine in erect position in a superconducting open-configuration MR system: preliminary results.  J Magn Reson Imaging . 1998;  8 1329-1333
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Schenck J F, Jolesz F A, Roemer P B. et al . Superconducting open-configuration MR imaging system for image-guided therapy.  Radiology . 1995;  195 805-814
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Dai L Y, Xu Y K, Zhang W M, Zhou Z H. The effect of flexion-extension motion of the lumbar spine on the capacity of the spinal canal. An experimental study.  Spine . 1989;  14 523-538
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Quint U, Wilke H J, Shirazi-Adl A, Parnianpour M, Loer F, Claes L E. Importance of the intersegmental trunk muscles for the stability of the lumbar spine. A biomechanical study in vitro.  Spine . 1998;  23 1937-1945
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Chung S S, Lee C S, Kim S H, Chung M W, Ahn J M. Effect of low back posture on the morphology of the spinal canal.  Skeletal Radiol . 2000;  29 217-223
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Fennell A J, Jones A P, Hukins D W. Migration of the nucleus pulposus within the intervertebral disc during flexion and extension of the spine.  Spine . 1996;  21 2753-2757
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Harvey S B, Smith F W, Hukins D W. Measurement of lumbar spine flexion-extension using a low-field open-magnet magnetic resonance scanner.  Invest Radiol . 1998;  33 439-443
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Kimura S, Steinbach G C, Watenpaugh D E, Hargens A R. Lumbar spine disk height and curvature responses to axial load generated by a compression device compatible with magnetic resonance imaging.  Spine . 2001;  26 2596-2600
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Sortland O, Magnaes B, Hauge T. Functional myelography with metrizamide in the diagnosis of lumbar spinal stenosis.  Acta Radiol Suppl . 1977;  355 42-54
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Bell G R, Ross J S. Diagnosis of nerve root compression. Myelography, computed tomography, and MRI.  Orthop Clin North Am . 1992;  23 405-419
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Bolender N F, Schonstrom N S, Spengler D M. Role of computed tomography and myelography in the diagnosis of central spinal stenosis.  J Bone Joint Surg Am . 1985;  67 240-246
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Badami J P, Baker R A, Scholz F J, McLaughlin M. Outpatient metrizamide myelography: prospective evaluation of safety and cost effectiveness.  Radiology . 1986;  158 175-177
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Peterman S B. Postmyelography headache: a review.  Radiology . 1996;  200 765-770
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Weishaupt D, Zanetti M, Hodler J, Boos N. MR imaging of the lumbar spine: prevalence of intervertebral disk extrusion and sequestration, nerve root compression, end plate abnormalities, and osteoarthritis of the facet joints in asymptomatic volunteers.  Radiology . 1998;  209 661-666
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
      >