MRI has been
found to demonstrate an abnormal disk in approximately 28% of subjects without
back pain or sciatica. Provocative discography is the only method that
directly relates a radiographic image to the patientķs pain. A CT/discogram is considered as positive, only if significant
pain and an abnormal image are present. When these two portions of the
test are taken into account, the study results in a 100%
specificity. Discography has been found to be more sensitive than MRI in
detecting annular fissures. CT/discography has an overall accuracy of
87-94%. Discography was not found to be sensitive to lesions in the
middle or outer annulus that are not contiguous with the nucleus. MRI,
when compared to discography, is significantly better in demonstrating disk herniations (100% versus 86%). Discography was found
to be more sensitive than myelography in detecting
lateral disk herniations, especially at the L5-S1
level. It is recommended that MRI be used initially in the diagnosis of
low back pain. In terms of surgical outcome, it has been found that when a
patient has both, a positive abnormal discographic
image and a painful provocative injection, there is an 88% success rate in
terms of a surgery while those patients that displayed a positive image but no
symptomatic pain reproduction, the success rate is only 52%.
CT/discography can identify recurrent disk herniations
not visualized by Gadolinium enhanced MRI.
Pain
Provocation hypothesis:
1. The injection may increase intradiscal pressure, which, in an abnormal disk, may stimulate nerve endings within the annular fibers of the disk, possible by stretching them.
2. The injection may result in some biochemical or neuro chemical stimulation that causes pain.
3. An injection may increase pressure at the end plates or pressure may be transferred to the vertebral body throughout the end plate resulting in an increase in intervertebral pressure and therefore pain. This hypothesis is supported by studies reporting disk injection resulting in end plate deflection and increased specimen height.
4. Another hypothesis to explain the presence of pain from injection of a seemingly normal disk is that pressure from the injection is transferred to an abnormal, symptomatic adjacent disk and, thus, a positive pain response is elicited.
The three (3) main indications are:
1. To help assign the details of an operation.
2. To help decided whether or not to perform the surgery.
3. To determine if the patient is a candidate for IDET (Intradiscal Radiofrequency Annuloplasty / Nucleoplasty).
Discography should be performed only if the patient has failed adequate attempts of conservative therapy and noninvasive diagnostic tests, such as MRI.
Specific indications for discography include, but are not limited to, the following:
1. Further evaluation of abnormal disks or recurrent pain from a previously operated disk and lateral disk herniation.
2. Patients with persistent, severe symptoms in whom other diagnostic tests have failed to reveal clear confirmation of a suspected disk as a source of the pain.
3. Assessment of failed surgery patients to determine if there is painful pseudo arthrosis or a symptomatic disk in a posteriorly viewed segment.
4. Assessment of disks, prior to fusion, to determine if the disks proposed fusion segment are symptomatic and to determine if disks adjacent to this segment can support a fusion.
5. Assessment of minimally invasive surgical candidates confirmed a contained disk herniation or to investigate dye distribution pattern prior to chemonucleolysis.
6. Patients with persistent, severe back pain in whom other diagnostic tests have failed to reveal the etiology.
Complications
of discography
Complications associated with discography include:
spinal headache, meningitis, discitis, intrathecal
hemorrhage, arachnoiditis, severe
reaction to accidental intradural injection, damage
to the disk itself, urticaria, retroperitoneal
hemorrhage, nausea (2%), convulsions (4%), headache (10%), and increased pain
(81%). Discography was found not to result in herniation of nucleus material or
annular deterioration. Eight (8) year follow-up has demonstrated no
damage to normal discs after discography.
Anesthesia
It is recommended that short acting medications (Propofol, Remifentanil, etc.) be used, since it is absolutely necessary to have an awake and responsive patient for questioning about reproduction of pain. If possible, avoid Bezodiazepines or long acting narcotics that can confuse the interpretation of the results. We use intravenous Norflex (orphenedrine) 60 mg + Toradol (ketorolac) 60 mg before the start of any pain procedures.
Contrast
Material
You should always use a water-soluble, nonirritating, non-ionic, preservative-free, hypoallergenic contrast. We currently use Isovue 300M. An abnormal disk will usually accept two (2) or more ml of fluid
Clinical
Symptoms
Interestingly, there are some studies to clinically evaluate discogenic pain by using a ģbony vibration stimulation". An attempt should be made to determine whether or not the patient can feel pain by placing a tuning fork over the spinous processes. The main symptoms are:
1. Internal disk disruption - The primary symptom is back pain.
2. Symptomatic disk herniations - Leg pain is the dominant complaint and is always greater than back pain in the fully developed radicular syndrome.
Procedure
Prophylactic
antibiotics and/or antihistamines should be considered. A double needle
technique should always be used. The injection should be performed with
contrast as previously described. (Water-soluble,
etc.). Accurate needle
placement is required to avoid annular injections, which could produce false
positive results. Injection against the vertebral end plate can also cause
false positive response.
The
information recorded should include:
1. The resistance to the injection. (End-point)
2. The amount of contrast injected. (Maximum Volume)
3. The volume at which the patient experienced pain. (Pain Volume)
4. The pattern of dye distribution. (Diffuse, location of fissure, extravasation, herniations, Schmorl's node, etc.).
5. Pressure at which patient experienced a "pressure sensation".
6. Pressure at which the patient experienced "Pain".
7. The pain response. (Location, character, distribution, intensity, and concordance or discordance with the patientķs typical pain and pain pattern)
Pain intensity is recorded on a 0-10 scale
Interpretation
Very
careful attention should be paid to interpretation the pain response during the
injection of each disk, including if the pain is similar to or exactly like the
symptoms for which the patient seeks relief. The
location of the pain, and its intensity. Discography should then
be followed by actual CT scanning.
CT classification of Discography:
|
|
|
|
|
|
Type 1 the discogram is normal manometrically, volume metrically, radiographically,
and produced no pain. The CT discogram showed
contrast to be centrally located in the axial and sagittal
projections. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Type 2 is identical to type 1 except that it is positive for reproduction
of pain. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Type 3 the annular tears lead to a radial fissure. This
group is further subdivided into Type 3a when the radial fissure is posterior,3b when it radiates posterolateral,
and 3c when the fissure extends lateral to a line drawn from the center of
the disk tangential to the lateral border of the superior articulating
process. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Type 4 once the radial fissure reaches the periphery of the
annulus fibrosus, nuclear material may protrude
causing the outer annulus to bulg |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Type 5 when the outer annular fibers rupture, nuclear material
may extrude beneath the posterior longitudinal ligament and come in direct contact
with either the dura or a nerve root. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Type 6 when the extruded fragment is no longer in continuity
with the interspace it is said to
be sequestrated. Manometrically,
volumetrically, and radiographically, the discograms are always abnormal. Familiar pain may
only be reproduced if enough pressure is generated against the free fragment
to cause stimulation of the pain sensitive structures. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Type 7 the end stage of this degeneration is internal disk disruption,
in which multiple annular tears occur. The discograms
are abnormal manometrically, volumetrically, and
familiar pain may or may not be reproduced. Radiographically,
the contrast usually fills the entire interspace in
a chaotic fashion. The CT discograms show
contrast extravasation throughout multiple annular
tears. |
|
|
|
|
|
Clinical
classification:
1. No pain or pressure. (NP)
2. Pressure (P)
3. Pain dissimilar to clinical symptoms. (D)
4. Pain similar to clinical symptoms. (S)(Inconsistent)
5. Exact reproduction of symptoms. (ER)(Concordant)
6.
Pain
intensity is recorded on a 0-10scale
|
|
ģCotton Ballī |
|
ģLobularī |
|
|
ģIrregularī |
|
|
ģFissuredī |
|
|
ģRupturedī |
|
|
|
|
|
Discogram Type |
Stage of Disk Degeneration |
|
ģCotton Ballī (CB) |
No signs of degeneration, Soft white amorphous nucleus |
|
ģLobularī (L) |
Mature disk with nucleus starting to degenerate into fibrous lumps. |
|
ģIrregularī (I) |
Degenerated disk with fissures and clefts in the nucleus and inner annulus. |
|
ģFissuredī (F) |
Degenerated disk with radio fissure leading to the outer edge of the annulus. |
|
ģRupturedī (R) |
Disk has a complete radio fissure that allows injected fluid to escape. Can be in any stage of degeneration. |
Reference: ģThe Stages of disc degeneration as revealed by discograms.ī M.A. Adams, P. Dolan, W.C. Hutton. The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery ń British Edition. Vol. 68-B No.1, January1986.
1. Low resistance is generally associated with a tear throughout the outer annulus.
2. Pain at high pressures is possibly due to mechanical irritation, end-plate deflection, or stimulation of pressure receptors.
3. Intradiscal pressure of 60-70 pounds per square inch (PSI) is the maximum pressure that can be sustained by manual injection technique (thumb pressure on a 3.0 cc luer-lock syringe.)
4. Generally, if a large volume of contrast can be injected, the disc is degenerated or there is a fissure extending through the outer annular wall.
5. In general, degeneration of the intervertebral disc will cause a decrease in the mean intradiscal pressures.
6. Opening or intrinsic pressure is defined as the pressure at which the contrast starts to enter a disc.
7. Leakage pressure is defined as the pressure on the P-V curve, where a sudden change occurs in the curve inclination, whereby the volume increased substantially, while the pressure either stopped increasing, or changed minimally.
8. Chemical irritation is defined as pain at or below 15 PSI above opening pressure.
9. Mechanical irritation is defined as pain between 15 and 50 PSI above opening pressure.
10. Indeterminate discs are defined as having pain between 51 and 90 PSI above opening pressure.
11. Normal disc have no pain.
12. Annular disruption ń leaking / protrusion / annular fissuring
13. Kpa x0.14504 = PSI
|
Intradiscal Pressure Values for Different Positions and Exercises |
|
Position |
Pressure (PSI) |
|
Lying supine |
15 |
|
Lying on the side |
17 |
|
Lying prone |
16 |
|
Lying prone, extended back, supporting on elbows |
36 |
|
Laughing heartily, lying laterally |
22 |
|
Sneezing, lying laterally |
55 |
|
Peaks by turning around |
102-116 |
|
Standing, relaxed |
73 |
|
Standing, performing valsalva maneuver |
133 |
|
Standing, bent forward |
160 |
|
Sitting relaxed, without backrest |
67 |
|
Sitting actively straightening the back |
80 |
|
Sitting with maximum flexion |
120 |
|
Sitting bent forward with tight supporting the elbows |
62 |
|
Sitting slouched into the chair |
39 |
|
Standing up from a chair |
160 |
|
Walking barefoot |
77-94 |
|
Walking with tennis shoes |
77-94 |
|
Jogging with hard street shoes |
51-138 |
|
Jogging with tennis shoes |
51-123 |
|
Climbing stairs, one at a time |
73-102 |
|
Climbing stairs, two at a time |
44-174 |
|
Walking down stairs, one stair at a time |
55-87 |
|
Walking down stairs, two stairs at a time |
44-131 |
|
Lifting 20Kg, bent over with round back |
334 |
|
Lifting 20Kg, as taught in back school |
247 |
|
Holding 20Kg close to the body |
160 |
|
Holding 20Kg, 60cm away from the chest |
261 |
|
Pressure increase during night (over a period of 7 hr.) |
15-36 |
Reference: ģ New In Vivo Measurements of Pressures in the Intervertebral Disc in Daily Lifeī Wilke et al. Spine Vol.24, No 8, pp755-762,1999.
|
Level |
Average Volume (ml) |
|
|
L2-3 |
0.58 |
0.4 - 0.7 |
|
L3-4 |
1.06 |
0.4 - 2.6 |
|
L4-5 |
1.09 |
0.22 - 2.4 |
|
L5-S1 |
0.99 |
0.42 - 2.0 |
|
Transition |
0.40 |
NA |
|
Discogram Type |
Mean Injection Pressure (PSI) |
Mean Injection Volume (mL) |
|
1 |
34 |
0.62 |
|
2 |
28 |
0.71 |
|
3 |
26 |
1.20 |
|
4 |
17 |
1.54 |
|
5 |
19 |
More than 2.0 |
Disk Classification
|
Intradiscal Pressure |
Pain Response Intensity |
Pain Response Category |
|
0-normal |
>80 PSI |
0 |
NA |
|
1-asymptomatic |
>50 PSI |
Pressure, discomfort only |
NA |
|
1-asymptomatic |
>50 PSI |
Definite pain (>5/10) |
Discordant |
|
2-indeterminate |
<50 PSI |
Definite pain (>5/10) |
Discordant |
|
3-mechanical (strain) |
30-50 PSI |
Definite pain (>5/10) |
Discordant |
|
4-chemical (sensitized) |
<30 PSI |
>5/10 |
Concordant |