Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 12, 2025
Transtubular Endoscopic Posterolateral Decompression for L5-S1 Lumbar Lateral Disc Herniation
Published on: October 14, 2022
Value of imaging examinations in diagnosing lumbar disc herniation: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Zhihao Huang1, Pengfei Zhao2, Chengming Zhang3
1School of Big Data and Fundamental Sciences, Shandong Institute of Petroleum and Chemical Technology, Dongying, China.
Purpose:
To systematically review the clinical value of three imaging examinations (Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Computed Tomography, and myelography) in the diagnosis of Lumbar Disc Herniation.
Methods:
Databases including PubMed, Embase, The Cochrane Library, Web of Science, CBM, CNKI, WanFang Data, and VIP were electronically searched to collect relevant studies on three imaging examinations in the diagnosis of Lumbar Disc Herniation from inception to July 1, 2021. Two reviewers using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 tool independently screened the literature, extracted the data, and assessed the risk of bias of included studies. Then, meta-analysis was performed by using Meta-DiSc 1.4 software and Stata 15.0 software.
Results:
A total of 38 studies from 19 articles were included, involving 1,875 patients. The results showed that the pooled Sensitivity, pooled Specificity, pooled Positive Likelihood Ratio, pooled Negative Likelihood Ratio, pooled Diagnostic Odds Ratio, Area Under the Curve of Summary Receiver Operating Characteristic, and Q* were 0.89 (95%CI: 0.87-0.91), 0.83 (95%CI: 0.78-0.87), 4.57 (95%CI: 2.95-7.08), 0.14 (95%CI: 0.09-0.22), 39.80 (95%CI: 18.35-86.32), 0.934, and 0.870, respectively, for Magnetic Resonance Imaging. The pooled Sensitivity, pooled Specificity, pooled Positive Likelihood Ratio, pooled Negative Likelihood Ratio, pooled Diagnostic Odds Ratio, Area Under the Curve of Summary Receiver Operating Characteristic, and Q* were 0.82 (95%CI: 0.79-0.85), 0.78 (95%CI: 0.73-0.82), 3.54 (95%CI: 2.86-4.39), 0.19 (95%CI: 0.12-0.30), 20.47 (95%CI: 10.31-40.65), 0.835, and 0.792, respectively, for Computed Tomography. The pooled Sensitivity, pooled Specificity, pooled Positive Likelihood Ratio, pooled Negative Likelihood Ratio, pooled Diagnostic Odds Ratio, Area Under the Curve of Summary Receiver Operating Characteristic, and Q* were 0.79 (95%CI: 0.75-0.82), 0.75 (95%CI: 0.70-0.80), 2.94 (95%CI: 2.43-3.56), 0.29 (95%CI: 0.21-0.42), 9.59 (95%CI: 7.05-13.04), 0.834, and 0.767 respectively, for myelography.
Conclusion:
Three imaging examinations had high diagnostic value. In addition, compared with myelography, Magnetic Resonance Imaging had a higher diagnostic value.
Related Concept Videos
01:20Imaging Studies for Cardiovascular System III: X-Ray
Definition and Purpose
An X-ray, or radiograph, is a non-invasive method that uses ionizing radiation to take images of internal structures. It is mainly used in cardiac imaging to examine the heart, lungs, and major blood vessels, aiming to identify abnormalities in the heart's size, shape, and position, such as heart failure, congenital defects, and vascular...
01:14Imaging Studies I: CT and MRI
Description of the Procedures
Computed Tomography (CT) scan:
Computed Tomography (CT) scans use X-ray technology to generate detailed images of bones, organs, and tissues. During the scan, the patient lies on a moving table...
01:17Ultrasonography
During an ultrasonography procedure, a handheld device called...
01:30Radiological Investigation I: X-ray and CT