Cauda equina syndrome – What is the correlation between clinical assessment and MRI scanning?

2007 ◽  
Vol 21 (2) ◽  
pp. 201-203 ◽  
Author(s):  
D. A. Bell ◽  
D. Collie ◽  
P. F. Statham
2020 ◽  
Vol 102-B (6) ◽  
pp. 677-682
Author(s):  
Galateia Katzouraki ◽  
Akbar Jaleel Zubairi ◽  
Oded Hershkovich ◽  
Michael P. Grevitt

Aims Diagnosis of cauda equina syndrome (CES) remains difficult; clinical assessment has low accuracy in reliably predicting MRI compression of the cauda equina (CE). This prospective study tests the usefulness of ultrasound bladder scans as an adjunct for diagnosing CES. Methods A total of 260 patients with suspected CES were referred to a tertiary spinal unit over a 16-month period. All were assessed by Board-eligible spinal surgeons and had transabdominal ultrasound bladder scans for pre- and post-voiding residual (PVR) volume measurements before lumbosacral MRI. Results The study confirms the low predictive value of ‘red flag’ symptoms and signs. Of note ‘bilateral sciatica’ had a sensitivity of 32.4%, and a positive predictive value (PPV) of only 17.2%, and negative predictive value (NPV) 88.3%. Use of a PVR volume of ≥ 200 ml was a demonstrably more accurate test for predicting cauda equina compression on subsequent MRI (p < 0.001). The PVR sensitivity was 94.1%, specificity 66.8%, PPV 29.9% and NPV 98.7%. The PVR allowed risk-stratification with 13% patients deemed ‘low-risk’ of CES. They had non-urgent MRI scans. None of the latter scans showed any cauda equina compression (p < 0.006) or individuals developed subsequent CES in the intervening period. There were considerable cost-savings associated with the above strategy. Conclusion This is the largest reported prospective evaluation of suspected CES. Use of the PVR volume ≥ 200 ml was considerably more accurate in predicting CES. It is a useful adjunct to conventional clinical assessment and allows risk-stratification in managing suspected CES. If adopted widely it is less likely incomplete CES would be missed. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2020;102-B(6):677–682.


2010 ◽  
Vol 24 (4) ◽  
pp. 383-386 ◽  
Author(s):  
Karthikeyan Balasubramanian ◽  
Pratipal Kalsi ◽  
Charles G. Greenough ◽  
Manjunath Prasad Kuskoor Seetharam

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rachel L. Leech ◽  
James Selfe ◽  
Suzanne Ball ◽  
Susan Greenhalgh ◽  
Gareth Hogan ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
G.R. González Toledo ◽  
H. Pérez Pérez ◽  
L. Brage Martín ◽  
V. Castro López-Tarruella

2021 ◽  
Vol 163 (4) ◽  
pp. 1191-1198
Author(s):  
Andreas K. Demetriades ◽  
Marco Mancuso-Marcello ◽  
Asfand Baig Mirza ◽  
Joseph Frantzias ◽  
David A. Bell ◽  
...  

Abstract Introduction Isolated acute bilateral foot drop due to degenerative spine disease is an extremely rare neurosurgical presentation, whilst the literature is rich with accounts of chronic bilateral foot drop occurring as a sequela of systemic illnesses. We present, to our knowledge, the largest case series of acute bilateral foot drop, with trauma and relevant systemic illness excluded. Methods Data from three different centres had been collected at the time of historic treatment, and records were subsequently reviewed retrospectively, documenting the clinical presentation, radiological level of compression, timing of surgery, and degree of neurological recovery. Results Seven patients are presented. The mean age at presentation was 52.1 years (range 41–66). All patients but one were male. All had a painful radiculopathic presentation. Relevant discopathy was observed from L2/3 to L5/S1, the commonest level being L3/4. Five were treated within 24 h of presentation, and two within 48 h. Three had concomitant cauda equina syndrome; of these, the first two made a full motor recovery, one by 6 weeks follow-up and the second on the same-day post-op evaluation. Overall, five out of seven cases had full resolution of their ankle dorsiflexion pareses. One patient with 1/5 power has not improved. Another with 1/5 weakness improved to normal on the one side and to 3/5 on the other. Conclusion When bilateral foot drop occurs acutely, we encourage the consideration of degenerative spinal disease. Relevant discopathy was observed from L2/3 to L5/S1; aberrant innervation may be at play. Cauda equina syndrome is not necessarily associated with acute bilateral foot drop. The prognosis seems to be pretty good with respect to recovery of the foot drop, especially if partial at presentation and if treated within 48 h.


Author(s):  
Nithish Jayakumar ◽  
Lucie Ferguson ◽  
Justin Nissen ◽  
Damian Holliman

2021 ◽  
Vol 108 (Supplement_2) ◽  
Author(s):  
D Richardson ◽  
F Greenway ◽  
A Mostofi ◽  
E Pereira

Abstract Introduction Cauda equina syndrome (CES) is a spinal emergency that cannot be reliably detected through clinical examination alone and as a result requires prompt MR imaging to provide a diagnosis. This audit examined compliance to standard of care following service improvements in line with the updated SBNS/BASS national guidelines for CES. Method A retrospective analysis of 200 patients referred to neurosurgery for suspected CES: 100 pre- and 100 post-service improvement SBNS guideline implementation. The online neurosurgical database was reviewed, cases assessed for completeness of referral information (including appropriate exam and pre-referral MRI) with patient demographics, referring hospital and outcome also recorded. Results Prior to the SBNS guidelines only 19 patients received MRI prior to referral, 70% of all referrals were incomplete or contained erroneous clinical information. Post-service improvements there was a 68% increase of pre-referral MRI (32 cases), and an improvement in quality of clinical information with only 19% of referrals providing insufficient or unreliable information. Conclusions Through relatively simple changes to local policy, patient care flow and education of emergency department clinicians we have significantly improved pre-referral MRI rates as well as overall referral quality across the whole DGH network.


2013 ◽  
Vol 79 (3-4) ◽  
pp. 594.e5-594.e8 ◽  
Author(s):  
J.D. Bartleson ◽  
Gary M. Miller ◽  
Giuseppe Lanzino

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document