Top

Journal of Orthopaedics and Traumatology

Published in:

Open Access 01-09-2013 | Original Article

Application of a correlation between the lumbar Torg ratio and the area of the spinal canal to predict lumbar stenosis: a study of 420 postmortem subjects

Authors: Navkirat S. Bajwa, Jason O. Toy, Nicholas U. Ahn

Published in: Journal of Orthopaedics and Traumatology | Issue 3/2013

Abstract

Background

A cervical Torg ratio of 0.8 has been used as a screening tool to determine the presence of cervical spinal stenosis. However, there have been no studies done to define the Torg ratio in the lumbar spine for predicting lumbar spinal stenosis (LSS). Torg ratios have never been correlated with the actual calculated canal area as derived from anatomic specimens. The aim of this study was to provide an analysis of the utility of the lumbar Torg ratio for predicting LSS based on objective measurements of skeletal specimens.

Materials and methods

420 adult skeletal specimens from the Hamann Todd Collection in the Cleveland Museum of Natural History were selected. Digital calipers were used to measure the sagittal diameter (SCD), interpedicular distance, pedicle length, and vertebral body diameter. The canal area at each level was calculated using a geometric formula. A standard distribution curve for canal area and Torg ratio was created, and values that were that is less than the mean minus two standard deviations (SD) below the mean were considered stenotic. Regression analysis was performed to determine if the Torg ratio was correlated with canal area, and if a “below normal” Torg ratio was predictive of LSS.

Results

The Torg ratio for 2SD below the mean was defined as 0.43 at L1, 0.43 at L2, 0.41 at L3, 0.38 at L4, 0.37 at L5. Regression analysis revealed a significant association of the Torg ratio with canal area (p < 0.01). A Torg ratio that was less than the mean − 2SD predicted canal stenosis at L2, L3, L4, and L5 (p < 0.01). Using a Torg ratio of <0.5 predicted stenosis with a sensitivity of 86 % and specificity of 52 % at all lumbar levels.

Conclusions

Based on the results of our study, we have defined the lower limit of the normal Torg ratio at each level. A Torg ratio of <0.5 predicts LSS and could be a useful radiological tool for LSS screening.

Verbiest H (1950) Primary stenosis of the lumbar spinal canal in adults, a new syndrome. Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd 94(33):2415–2433PubMed

Johnsson KE (1995) Lumbar spinal stenosis: a retrospective study of 163 cases in southern Sweden. Acta Orthop Scand 66(5):403–405PubMedCrossRef

Kalichman L, Cole R, Kim DH, Li L, Suri P, Guermazi A (2009) Spinal stenosis prevalence and association with symptoms: the Framingham Study. Spine J 9(7):545–550PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

Jane JA Sr, Jane JA Jr, Helm GA, Kallmes DF, Shaffrey CI, Chadduck JB, DiPierro CG (1996) Acquired lumbar spinal stenosis. Clin Neurosurg 43:275–299PubMed

Mirkovic S, Garfin SR, Rydevik B, Lipson SJ (1992) Pathophysiology of spinal stenosis. Instr Course Lect 41:165–177PubMed

Postacchini F, Ripani M, Carpano S (1983) Morphometry of the lumbar vertebrae. An anatomic study in two caucasoid ethnic groups. Clin Orthop Relat Res 172:296–303PubMed

Larsen JL, Smith D (1981) The lumbar spinal canal in children. Part I: the sagittal diameter. Eur J Radiol 1(2):163–170PubMed

Larsen JL (1981) The lumbar spinal canal in children. Part II: the interpedicular distance and its relation to the sagittal diameter and transverse pedicular width. Eur J Radiol 1(4):312–321PubMed

Twomey LT, Taylor JR (1988) Age changes in the lumbar spinal and intervertebral canals. Paraplegia 26:238–249PubMedCrossRef

10.

Genevay S, Atlas SJ (2010) Lumbar spinal stenosis. Best Pract Res Clin Rheumatol 24(2):253–265PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

11.

Schonstrom NSA, Bolender NF, Spengler DM (1985) The pathomorphology of spinal stenosis as seen on CT scans of the lumbar spine. Spine 10:806–811PubMedCrossRef

12.

Bolender N-F, Schonstrom NSA, Spengler DM (1985) Role of computer tomography and myelography in the diagnosis of central spinal stenosis. J Bone Joint Surg Am 67:240–246PubMed

13.

Medic MT, Masaryk T, Boumphrey F, Goormastic M, Bell G (1986) Lumbar hemiated disk disease and canal stenosis: prospective evaluation by surface coil MA, CT, and myelography. AJR 147:757–765CrossRef

14.

Schnebel B, Kingston S, Watkins R, Dillin W (1989) Comparison of MRI to contrast CT in the diagnosis of spinal stenosis. Spine 14:332–337PubMedCrossRef

15.

Boden SD, Davis DO, Dma TS, Patronas NJ, Wiesel SW (1990) Abnormal magnetic-resonance scans of the lumbar spine in asymptomatic subjects: a prospective investigation. J Bone Joint Surg Am 72-A:403–408

16.

Epstein NE, Epstein JA, Carras A, Hyman AA (1990) Far lateral lumbar disc hemiations and associated structural abnormalities: an evaluation in sixty patients of the comparative value of CT, MAI, and myelo-CT. Spine 15:534–539PubMedCrossRef

17.

De Graaf I, Prak A, Bierma-Zeinstra S, Thomas S, Peul W, Koes B (2006) Diagnosis of lumbar spinal stenosis: a systematic review of the accuracy of diagnostic tests. Spine 31(10):1168–1176PubMedCrossRef

18.

Eisenstein S (1977) The morphometry and pathological anatomy of the lumbar spine in South African negroes and caucasoids with specific reference to spinal stenosis. J Bone Joint Surg Br 59(2):173–180PubMed

19.

Elsberg CA, Dyke CG (1934) The diagnosis and localization of tumors of the spinal cord by means and measurements. Bull Neurol Inst N Y 3:359–394

20.

Landmesser WE Jr, Heublein GW (1953) Measurement of the normal interpedicular space in the child. Conn State Med J 17(4):310–313PubMed

21.

Simril WA, Thurston D (1955) The normal interpediculate space in the spines of infants and children. Radiology 64(3):340–347PubMedCrossRef

22.

Hinck VC, Hopkins CE, Clark WM (1965) Sagittal diameter of the lumbar spinal canal in children and adults. Radiology 85(5):929–937PubMedCrossRef

23.

Jones RAC, Thomson JLG (1968) The narrow lumbar canal: a clinical and radiological review. J Bone Joint Surg Br 50-B:595–605

24.

Karantanas AH, Zibis AH, Papaliaga M, Georgiou E, Rousogiannis S (1998) Dimensions of the lumbar spinal canal: variations and correlations with somatometric parameters using CT. Eur Radiol 8(9):1581–1585PubMedCrossRef

25.

Postacchini F, Perugia D (1991) Degenerative lumbar spondylolisthesis. Part I: etiology, pathogenesis, pathomorphology, and clinical features. Ital J Orthop Traumatol 17(2):165–173PubMed

26.

Pavlov H, Torg JS, Robie B, Jahre C (1987) Cervical spinal stenosis: determination with vertebral body ratio method. Radiology 164(3):771–775PubMedCrossRef

27.

Gepstein R, Folman Y, Sagiv P, Ben David Y, Hallel T (1991) Does the anteroposterior diameter of the bony spinal canal reflect its size? An anatomical study. Surg Radiol Anat 13(4):289–291PubMedCrossRef

28.

Visuri T, Ulaska J, Eskelin M, Pulkkinen P (2005) Narrowing of lumbar spinal canal predicts chronic low back pain more accurately than intervertebral disc degeneration: a magnetic resonance imaging study in young Finnish male conscripts. Mil Med 170(11):926–930PubMedCrossRef

29.

Leiviskä T, Videman T, Nurminen T, Troup JD (1985) Radiographic versus direct measurements of the spinal canal at lumbar vertebrae L3–L5 and their relations to age and body stature. Acta Radiol Diagn (Stockh) 26(4):403–411

30.

Lohman CM, Tallroth K, Kettunen JA, Lindgren KA (2006) Comparison of radiologic signs and clinical symptoms of spinal stenosis. Spine 31(16):1834–1840PubMedCrossRef

31.

Ogikubo O, Forsberg L, Hansson T (2007) The relationship between the cross-sectional area of the cauda equina and the preoperative symptoms in central lumbar spinal stenosis. Spine 32(13):1423–1428PubMedCrossRef

32.

Kent DL, Haynor DR, Larson EB, Deyo RA (1992) Diagnosis of lumbar spinal stenosis in adults: a metaanalysis of the accuracy of CT, MR, and myelography. Am J Roentgenol 158(5):1135–1144CrossRef

33.

Amonoo-Kuofi HS (1982) Maximum and minimum lumbar interpedicular distances in normal adult Nigerians. J Anat 135(2):225–233PubMedCentralPubMed

34.

Amonoo-Kuofi HS (1985) The sagittal diameter of the lumbar vertebral canal in normal adult Nigerians. J Anat 140:69–78PubMedCentralPubMed

35.

Tacar O, Demirant A, Nas K, Altindağ O (2003) Morphology of the lumbar spinal canal in normal adult Turks. Yonsei Med J 44(4):679–685PubMedCrossRef

36.

Bente L, Gerrior SA (2002) Selected food highlights of the 20th century: US food supply series. Fam Econ Nutr Rev 14:43–52

Title: Application of a correlation between the lumbar Torg ratio and the area of the spinal canal to predict lumbar stenosis: a study of 420 postmortem subjects
Authors: Navkirat S. Bajwa
Jason O. Toy
Nicholas U. Ahn
Publication date: 01-09-2013
Publisher: Springer International Publishing
Published in: Journal of Orthopaedics and Traumatology / Issue 3/2013
Print ISSN: 1590-9921
Electronic ISSN: 1590-9999
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10195-013-0237-z

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Application of a correlation between the lumbar Torg ratio and the area of the spinal canal to predict lumbar stenosis: a study of 420 postmortem subjects

Abstract

Background

Materials and methods

Results

Conclusions

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Background

Materials and methods

Results

Conclusions

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 3/2013

Associated lesions in posterior wall acetabular fractures: not a valid predictor of failure

Evidence for treatment of muscular vein thrombosis in orthopaedic patients

Triple jeopardy: transscaphoid, transcapitate, transtriquetral, perilunate fracture dislocation

Fractured neck of femur patient care improved by simulated fast-track system

Magnetic resonance arthrography for femoroacetabular impingement surgery: is it reliable?

Rheumatoid nodule presenting as Morton’s neuroma