MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4312113745 · doi:10.3174/ajnr.a7749

Enhancing Annular Fissures and High-Intensity Zones: Pain, Internal Derangement, and Anesthetic Response at Provocation Lumbar Discography

2022· article· en· W4312113745 on OpenAlexaff
Walter S. Bartynski, Vikas Agarwal, H. Trang, Andriy I. Bandos, William E. Rothfus, Jawad Tsay, William Delfyett, B. Nastasi

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Neuroradiology · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicSpine and Intervertebral Disc Pathology
Canadian institutionsSt. Clair College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProvocation testMedicineDiscographyLumbarIntensity (physics)Low back painSagittal planeRadiologyNuclear medicineSurgeryPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: A high-intensity zone identified on preprocedural MR imaging is known to correlate with pain at provocation lumbar discography. The correlation between enhancing annular fissures and pain at provocation lumbar discography has not been comprehensively evaluated. The purpose of this study was to assess the pain response and imaging features at enhancing annular fissure nonoperated disc levels identified on preprocedural MR imaging with comparison with the high-intensity zone and nonenhancing disc levels in patients referred for provocation lumbar discography. MATERIALS AND METHODS: One-hundred nonoperated discs in 44 patients were retrospectively evaluated for an enhancing annular fissure on sagittal postcontrast T1-weighted pre-discogram MR imaging. Enhancing annular fissure discs were graded on the sagittal T2-weighted sequence (Grade 4: like CSF to Grade 1: negative/barely visible) for high-intensity-zone conspicuity. High-intensity-zone detection was performed independently. In the primary assessment, enhancing annular fissure and high-intensity zones were associated with pain response at provocation lumbar discography. Additional analysis included intradiscal anesthetic response and postdiscogram CT appearance. RESULTS: Thirty-nine discs demonstrated an enhancing annular fissure, with 23/39 demonstrating a high-intensity zone. The presence of a high-intensity zone predicted severe pain (concordant + nonconcordant; P = .005, sensitivity of 40%, specificity of 94%) and concordant pain (P = .007, sensitivity of 39%, specificity of 86%) at provocation lumbar discography. Enhancing annular fissures without a detected high-intensity zone were more frequently observed among severely painful (50%) and concordant (36%) discs than among discs negative for pain (9%; P = .01). This finding resulted in a substantially greater overall sensitivity of enhancing annular fissures for severe (P < .001, 64%) and concordant pain (P = .008, 61%), significantly improving the overall predictive ability of a high-intensity zone alone. A high-intensity zone went undetected in 9/11 Grade 1 disc levels with concordant pain present in 7/9. CONCLUSIONS: Consideration of enhancing annular fissures on preprocedural MR imaging substantially improves the prediction of severe/concordant pain in provocation lumbar discography.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.239 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations8
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of NeuroradiologySame topicSpine and Intervertebral Disc PathologyFrench-language works237,207