Lumbar Vertebral Endplate Defects on Magnetic Resonance Images
Bibliographic record
Abstract
STUDY DESIGN: A cross-sectional magnetic resonance (MR) imaging study. OBJECTIVE: To classify and characterize endplate defects using routine lumbar MR images and to determine associations of endplate defects with Modic changes (MCs) and disc degeneration. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Previously, a cadaveric study revealed that endplate lesions were common and associated with back pain history. New in vivo approaches appropriate for clinical studies are needed to further this potentially important line of research on the clinical significance of endplate lesions, including their relation with MCs, disc degeneration, and back pain. METHODS: Using a MRI archive, 1564 endplates of 133 subjects (59 men and 74 women, mean age 58.9 ± 11.9 years) with the presence of MCs were retrospectively collected from April of 2014 to June of 2015. On the basis of morphological characteristics, a protocol was proposed to identify three distinct types of endplate defects, including focal, corner, and erosive defects. The location, size, and distribution patterns of various endplate lesions were characterized. MCs and disc degeneration were measured to examine their associations with endplate defects. RESULTS: Endplate defects were observed in 27.8% of endplates studied. Greater age was associated with the presence of endplate defects. Focal defects were the most common (13.5%), followed by erosive defects (11.1%) and corner defects (3.2%). Defect types also differed in size and distribution patterns. Endplate defects and MCs had similar distribution patterns in the lumbar spine. The presence of endplate defects were associated with the presence of MCs (odds ratio = 4.29, P < 0.001), and associated with less disc signal intensity and disc height, and greater disc bulging (P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: The three endplate defects identified on routine MR images appear to represent different pathologies and may play a key role in the pathogenesis of MCs. This classification system may facilitate clinical studies on endplate defects. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".