Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2013 Apr;5(4):1214-1218.
doi: 10.3892/etm.2013.934. Epub 2013 Jan 30.

Prognostic value of magnetic resonance imaging combined with electromyography in the surgical management of cervical spondylotic myelopathy

Affiliations

Prognostic value of magnetic resonance imaging combined with electromyography in the surgical management of cervical spondylotic myelopathy

Fa-Jing Liu et al. Exp Ther Med. 2013 Apr.

Abstract

The present study aimed to evaluate the value of pre-operative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) combined with electromyography (EMG) for predicting clinical outcome following surgical management of cervical spondylotic myelopathy (CSM). A total of 94 patients with cervical compressive myelopathy were prospectively enrolled and treated with anterior, posterior and posterior-anterior united decompression between October 2007 and February 2009. Prior to surgery 1.5-T MRI and EMG were performed in all patients. The patients were classified into four types based on the presence (+) or absence (-) of an increased signal intensity (ISI) on the T2-weighted magnetic resonance (MR) images and also based on the positive (+)/negative (-) results of the EMG. The four types were as follows: Type I, MRI/EMG (-/-); Type II, MRI/EMG (+/-); Type III, MRI/EMG (-/+); and Type IV, MRI/EMG (+/+). The clinical outcome was also graded according to a modified Japanese Orthopedic Association (JOA) scoring system. Furthermore, pre- and post-operative clinical data were statistically analyzed to explore the correlation between the factors. There were 36 cases (38%) of Type I, 16 (17%) of Type II, 13 (14%) of Type III and 29 (31%) of Type IV. According to the analysis of the clinical data between the four types, there were significant differences in the disability classifications, pre-operative JOA scores and disease duration (P<0.05), but there were no significant differences in gender, age or cord compression ratios (P>0.05). Until the final follow-up, there was a significant difference in the recovery ratio between the four study groups (Hc=27.46, P<0.05). Further comparison showed that the surgical outcome was best in Type I patients and worst in Type IV patients. In conclusion, there was a distinct correlation between classification and the rate of clinical improvement. Patients who had a negative EMG and those without an ISI on T2-weight images tended to suffer only mild symptoms, a short disease duration and, most significantly, experience a good surgical outcome.

Keywords: cervical spondylotic myelopathy; electromyography; magnetic resonance imaging; prognosis.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Ohshio I, Hatayama A, Kaneda K, Takahara M, Nagashima K. Correlation between histopathologic features and magnetic resonance images of spinal cord lesions. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1993;18:1140–1149. - PubMed
    1. Yukawa Y, Kato F, Yoshihara H, Yanase M, Ito K. MR T2 image classification in cervical compression myelopathy: predictor of surgical outcomes. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2007;32:1675–1679. - PubMed
    1. Shen HX, Li L, Yang ZG, Hou TS. Position of increased signal intensity in the spinal cord on MR images: does it predict the outcome of cervical spondylotic myelopathy? Chin Med J (Engl) 2009;122:1418–1422. - PubMed
    1. Lo YL. How has electrophysiology changed the management of cervical spondylotic myelopathy? Eur J Neurol. 2008;15:781–786. - PubMed
    1. Barkhaus PE, Nandedkar SD. On the selection of concentric needle electromyogram motor unit action potentials: is the rise time criterion too restrictive? Muscle Nerve. 1996;19:1554–1560. - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources