Patterns of lumbar disc degeneration are different in degenerative disc disease and disc prolapse magnetic resonance imaging analysis of 224 patients
Abstract Background context Existing research on lumbar disc degeneration has remained inconclusive regarding its etiology, pathogenesis, symptomatology, prevention, and management. Degenerative disc disease (DDD) and disc prolapse (DP) are common diseases affecting the lumbar discs. Although they m...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | The spine journal 2014-02, Vol.14 (2), p.300-307 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 307 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 2 |
| container_start_page | 300 |
| container_title | The spine journal |
| container_volume | 14 |
| creator | Kanna, Rishi M., MS, MRCS, FNB Shetty, Ajoy Prasad, MS, DNB Rajasekaran, S., MS, MCh, FRCS(Ed), FRCS(London), FACS, PhD |
| description | Abstract Background context Existing research on lumbar disc degeneration has remained inconclusive regarding its etiology, pathogenesis, symptomatology, prevention, and management. Degenerative disc disease (DDD) and disc prolapse (DP) are common diseases affecting the lumbar discs. Although they manifest clinically differently, existing studies on disc degeneration have included patients with both these features, leading to wide variations in observations. The possible relationship or disaffect between DDD and DP is not fully evaluated. Purpose To analyze the patterns of lumbar disc degeneration in patients with chronic back pain and DDD and those with acute DP. Study design Prospective, magnetic resonance imaging–based radiological study. Methods Two groups of patients (aged 20–50 years) were prospectively studied. Group 1 included patients requiring a single level microdiscectomy for acute DP. Group 2 included patients with chronic low back pain and DDD. Discs were assessed by magnetic resonance imaging through Pfirmann grading, Schmorl nodes, Modic changes, and the total end-plate damage score for all the five lumbar discs. Results Group 1 (DP) had 91 patients and group 2 (DDD) had 133 patients. DP and DDD patients differed significantly in the number, extent, and severity of degeneration. DDD patients had a significantly higher number of degenerated discs than DP patients (p |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1016/j.spinee.2013.10.042 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1491058315</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S1529943013016471</els_id><sourcerecordid>1491058315</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c417t-9a87304fe6b950556d70daa3b956bc1fddce61bc6d1c074a788a1aa3977cee503</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFUl2L1DAUDaK4H_oPRPLoS8fcNG3aF0GW1RUWFNTnkCa3Q8ZOWpN2YX6I_9dbO4r4IgSSnHvu57mMvQCxAwH168MuTyEi7qSAkqCdUPIRu4RGNwXUpXxM70q2RatKccGucj4IIRoN8im7kEqWoHV7yX58svOMKWY-9nxYjp1N3IfsuMc9Rkx2DmPkNiGhfY8J48xD_Mv6gGd-yGgzchv9BkxpHOxEyNHuI87B8YR5jDY65IGwEPdEtsMph1_JpVR8ooCUIT9jT3o7ZHx-vq_Z13e3X27uivuP7z_cvL0vnAI9F61tdClUj3XXVqKqaq-Ft7akX9056L13WEPnag9OaGV101gge6u1Q6xEec1ebXGp2O8L5tkcqXQcBhtxXLIB1YKomhIqoqqN6tKYc8LeTInaSCcDwqyCmIPZBDGrICtKgpDby3OGpTui_-P0WwEivNkISH0-BEwmO5qBQx8Sutn4Mfwvw78B3BBicHb4hifMh3FJNGXqxWRphPm8LsW6E0CnVhrKn3vKtgg</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1491058315</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Patterns of lumbar disc degeneration are different in degenerative disc disease and disc prolapse magnetic resonance imaging analysis of 224 patients</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>ScienceDirect Journals (5 years ago - present)</source><creator>Kanna, Rishi M., MS, MRCS, FNB ; Shetty, Ajoy Prasad, MS, DNB ; Rajasekaran, S., MS, MCh, FRCS(Ed), FRCS(London), FACS, PhD</creator><creatorcontrib>Kanna, Rishi M., MS, MRCS, FNB ; Shetty, Ajoy Prasad, MS, DNB ; Rajasekaran, S., MS, MCh, FRCS(Ed), FRCS(London), FACS, PhD</creatorcontrib><description>Abstract Background context Existing research on lumbar disc degeneration has remained inconclusive regarding its etiology, pathogenesis, symptomatology, prevention, and management. Degenerative disc disease (DDD) and disc prolapse (DP) are common diseases affecting the lumbar discs. Although they manifest clinically differently, existing studies on disc degeneration have included patients with both these features, leading to wide variations in observations. The possible relationship or disaffect between DDD and DP is not fully evaluated. Purpose To analyze the patterns of lumbar disc degeneration in patients with chronic back pain and DDD and those with acute DP. Study design Prospective, magnetic resonance imaging–based radiological study. Methods Two groups of patients (aged 20–50 years) were prospectively studied. Group 1 included patients requiring a single level microdiscectomy for acute DP. Group 2 included patients with chronic low back pain and DDD. Discs were assessed by magnetic resonance imaging through Pfirmann grading, Schmorl nodes, Modic changes, and the total end-plate damage score for all the five lumbar discs. Results Group 1 (DP) had 91 patients and group 2 (DDD) had 133 patients. DP and DDD patients differed significantly in the number, extent, and severity of degeneration. DDD patients had a significantly higher number of degenerated discs than DP patients (p<.000). The incidence of multilevel and pan-lumbar degeneration was also significantly higher in DDD group. The pattern of degeneration also differed in both the groups. DDD patients had predominant upper lumbar involvement, whereas DP patients had mainly lower lumbar degeneration. Modic changes were more common in DP patients, especially at the prolapsed level. Modic changes were present in 37% of prolapsed levels compared with 9.9% of normal discs (p<.00). The total end-plate damage score had a positive correlation with disc degeneration in both the groups. Further the mean total end-plate damage score at prolapsed level was also significantly higher. Conclusion The results suggest that patients with disc prolapse, and those with back pain with DDD are clinically and radiologically different groups of patients with varying patterns, severity, and extent of disc degeneration. This is the first study in literature to compare and identify significant differences in these two commonly encountered patient groups. In patients with single-level DP, the majority of the other discs are nondegenerate, the lower lumbar spine is predominantly involved and the end-plate damage is higher. Patients with back pain and DDD have larger number of degenerate discs, early multilevel degeneration, and predominant upper lumbar degeneration. The knowledge that these two groups of patients are different clinically and radiologically is critical for our improved understanding of the disease and for future studies on disc degeneration and disc prolapse.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1529-9430</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1878-1632</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.spinee.2013.10.042</identifier><identifier>PMID: 24231779</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Elsevier Inc</publisher><subject>Acute Disease ; Adult ; Chronic Pain - diagnosis ; Chronic Pain - epidemiology ; Chronic Pain - pathology ; Diagnosis, Differential ; Disc degeneration ; Disc prolapse ; Diskectomy ; Female ; Humans ; Incidence ; Intervertebral Disc Degeneration - diagnosis ; Intervertebral Disc Degeneration - epidemiology ; Intervertebral Disc Degeneration - pathology ; Intervertebral Disc Displacement - diagnosis ; Intervertebral Disc Displacement - epidemiology ; Intervertebral Disc Displacement - pathology ; Low Back Pain - diagnosis ; Low Back Pain - epidemiology ; Low Back Pain - pathology ; Lumbar Vertebrae - pathology ; Lumbar Vertebrae - surgery ; Magnetic resonance imaging ; Magnetic Resonance Imaging - methods ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Orthopedics ; Patterns ; Prospective Studies ; Sciatica - epidemiology ; Sciatica - pathology ; Sciatica - surgery ; Severity of Illness Index ; Young Adult</subject><ispartof>The spine journal, 2014-02, Vol.14 (2), p.300-307</ispartof><rights>Elsevier Inc.</rights><rights>2014 Elsevier Inc.</rights><rights>Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c417t-9a87304fe6b950556d70daa3b956bc1fddce61bc6d1c074a788a1aa3977cee503</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c417t-9a87304fe6b950556d70daa3b956bc1fddce61bc6d1c074a788a1aa3977cee503</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.spinee.2013.10.042$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,3550,27924,27925,45995</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24231779$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Kanna, Rishi M., MS, MRCS, FNB</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Shetty, Ajoy Prasad, MS, DNB</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rajasekaran, S., MS, MCh, FRCS(Ed), FRCS(London), FACS, PhD</creatorcontrib><title>Patterns of lumbar disc degeneration are different in degenerative disc disease and disc prolapse magnetic resonance imaging analysis of 224 patients</title><title>The spine journal</title><addtitle>Spine J</addtitle><description>Abstract Background context Existing research on lumbar disc degeneration has remained inconclusive regarding its etiology, pathogenesis, symptomatology, prevention, and management. Degenerative disc disease (DDD) and disc prolapse (DP) are common diseases affecting the lumbar discs. Although they manifest clinically differently, existing studies on disc degeneration have included patients with both these features, leading to wide variations in observations. The possible relationship or disaffect between DDD and DP is not fully evaluated. Purpose To analyze the patterns of lumbar disc degeneration in patients with chronic back pain and DDD and those with acute DP. Study design Prospective, magnetic resonance imaging–based radiological study. Methods Two groups of patients (aged 20–50 years) were prospectively studied. Group 1 included patients requiring a single level microdiscectomy for acute DP. Group 2 included patients with chronic low back pain and DDD. Discs were assessed by magnetic resonance imaging through Pfirmann grading, Schmorl nodes, Modic changes, and the total end-plate damage score for all the five lumbar discs. Results Group 1 (DP) had 91 patients and group 2 (DDD) had 133 patients. DP and DDD patients differed significantly in the number, extent, and severity of degeneration. DDD patients had a significantly higher number of degenerated discs than DP patients (p<.000). The incidence of multilevel and pan-lumbar degeneration was also significantly higher in DDD group. The pattern of degeneration also differed in both the groups. DDD patients had predominant upper lumbar involvement, whereas DP patients had mainly lower lumbar degeneration. Modic changes were more common in DP patients, especially at the prolapsed level. Modic changes were present in 37% of prolapsed levels compared with 9.9% of normal discs (p<.00). The total end-plate damage score had a positive correlation with disc degeneration in both the groups. Further the mean total end-plate damage score at prolapsed level was also significantly higher. Conclusion The results suggest that patients with disc prolapse, and those with back pain with DDD are clinically and radiologically different groups of patients with varying patterns, severity, and extent of disc degeneration. This is the first study in literature to compare and identify significant differences in these two commonly encountered patient groups. In patients with single-level DP, the majority of the other discs are nondegenerate, the lower lumbar spine is predominantly involved and the end-plate damage is higher. Patients with back pain and DDD have larger number of degenerate discs, early multilevel degeneration, and predominant upper lumbar degeneration. The knowledge that these two groups of patients are different clinically and radiologically is critical for our improved understanding of the disease and for future studies on disc degeneration and disc prolapse.</description><subject>Acute Disease</subject><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Chronic Pain - diagnosis</subject><subject>Chronic Pain - epidemiology</subject><subject>Chronic Pain - pathology</subject><subject>Diagnosis, Differential</subject><subject>Disc degeneration</subject><subject>Disc prolapse</subject><subject>Diskectomy</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Incidence</subject><subject>Intervertebral Disc Degeneration - diagnosis</subject><subject>Intervertebral Disc Degeneration - epidemiology</subject><subject>Intervertebral Disc Degeneration - pathology</subject><subject>Intervertebral Disc Displacement - diagnosis</subject><subject>Intervertebral Disc Displacement - epidemiology</subject><subject>Intervertebral Disc Displacement - pathology</subject><subject>Low Back Pain - diagnosis</subject><subject>Low Back Pain - epidemiology</subject><subject>Low Back Pain - pathology</subject><subject>Lumbar Vertebrae - pathology</subject><subject>Lumbar Vertebrae - surgery</subject><subject>Magnetic resonance imaging</subject><subject>Magnetic Resonance Imaging - methods</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Orthopedics</subject><subject>Patterns</subject><subject>Prospective Studies</subject><subject>Sciatica - epidemiology</subject><subject>Sciatica - pathology</subject><subject>Sciatica - surgery</subject><subject>Severity of Illness Index</subject><subject>Young Adult</subject><issn>1529-9430</issn><issn>1878-1632</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2014</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNqFUl2L1DAUDaK4H_oPRPLoS8fcNG3aF0GW1RUWFNTnkCa3Q8ZOWpN2YX6I_9dbO4r4IgSSnHvu57mMvQCxAwH168MuTyEi7qSAkqCdUPIRu4RGNwXUpXxM70q2RatKccGucj4IIRoN8im7kEqWoHV7yX58svOMKWY-9nxYjp1N3IfsuMc9Rkx2DmPkNiGhfY8J48xD_Mv6gGd-yGgzchv9BkxpHOxEyNHuI87B8YR5jDY65IGwEPdEtsMph1_JpVR8ooCUIT9jT3o7ZHx-vq_Z13e3X27uivuP7z_cvL0vnAI9F61tdClUj3XXVqKqaq-Ft7akX9056L13WEPnag9OaGV101gge6u1Q6xEec1ebXGp2O8L5tkcqXQcBhtxXLIB1YKomhIqoqqN6tKYc8LeTInaSCcDwqyCmIPZBDGrICtKgpDby3OGpTui_-P0WwEivNkISH0-BEwmO5qBQx8Sutn4Mfwvw78B3BBicHb4hifMh3FJNGXqxWRphPm8LsW6E0CnVhrKn3vKtgg</recordid><startdate>20140201</startdate><enddate>20140201</enddate><creator>Kanna, Rishi M., MS, MRCS, FNB</creator><creator>Shetty, Ajoy Prasad, MS, DNB</creator><creator>Rajasekaran, S., MS, MCh, FRCS(Ed), FRCS(London), FACS, PhD</creator><general>Elsevier Inc</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20140201</creationdate><title>Patterns of lumbar disc degeneration are different in degenerative disc disease and disc prolapse magnetic resonance imaging analysis of 224 patients</title><author>Kanna, Rishi M., MS, MRCS, FNB ; Shetty, Ajoy Prasad, MS, DNB ; Rajasekaran, S., MS, MCh, FRCS(Ed), FRCS(London), FACS, PhD</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c417t-9a87304fe6b950556d70daa3b956bc1fddce61bc6d1c074a788a1aa3977cee503</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2014</creationdate><topic>Acute Disease</topic><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Chronic Pain - diagnosis</topic><topic>Chronic Pain - epidemiology</topic><topic>Chronic Pain - pathology</topic><topic>Diagnosis, Differential</topic><topic>Disc degeneration</topic><topic>Disc prolapse</topic><topic>Diskectomy</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Incidence</topic><topic>Intervertebral Disc Degeneration - diagnosis</topic><topic>Intervertebral Disc Degeneration - epidemiology</topic><topic>Intervertebral Disc Degeneration - pathology</topic><topic>Intervertebral Disc Displacement - diagnosis</topic><topic>Intervertebral Disc Displacement - epidemiology</topic><topic>Intervertebral Disc Displacement - pathology</topic><topic>Low Back Pain - diagnosis</topic><topic>Low Back Pain - epidemiology</topic><topic>Low Back Pain - pathology</topic><topic>Lumbar Vertebrae - pathology</topic><topic>Lumbar Vertebrae - surgery</topic><topic>Magnetic resonance imaging</topic><topic>Magnetic Resonance Imaging - methods</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Orthopedics</topic><topic>Patterns</topic><topic>Prospective Studies</topic><topic>Sciatica - epidemiology</topic><topic>Sciatica - pathology</topic><topic>Sciatica - surgery</topic><topic>Severity of Illness Index</topic><topic>Young Adult</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Kanna, Rishi M., MS, MRCS, FNB</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Shetty, Ajoy Prasad, MS, DNB</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rajasekaran, S., MS, MCh, FRCS(Ed), FRCS(London), FACS, PhD</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>The spine journal</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Kanna, Rishi M., MS, MRCS, FNB</au><au>Shetty, Ajoy Prasad, MS, DNB</au><au>Rajasekaran, S., MS, MCh, FRCS(Ed), FRCS(London), FACS, PhD</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Patterns of lumbar disc degeneration are different in degenerative disc disease and disc prolapse magnetic resonance imaging analysis of 224 patients</atitle><jtitle>The spine journal</jtitle><addtitle>Spine J</addtitle><date>2014-02-01</date><risdate>2014</risdate><volume>14</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>300</spage><epage>307</epage><pages>300-307</pages><issn>1529-9430</issn><eissn>1878-1632</eissn><abstract>Abstract Background context Existing research on lumbar disc degeneration has remained inconclusive regarding its etiology, pathogenesis, symptomatology, prevention, and management. Degenerative disc disease (DDD) and disc prolapse (DP) are common diseases affecting the lumbar discs. Although they manifest clinically differently, existing studies on disc degeneration have included patients with both these features, leading to wide variations in observations. The possible relationship or disaffect between DDD and DP is not fully evaluated. Purpose To analyze the patterns of lumbar disc degeneration in patients with chronic back pain and DDD and those with acute DP. Study design Prospective, magnetic resonance imaging–based radiological study. Methods Two groups of patients (aged 20–50 years) were prospectively studied. Group 1 included patients requiring a single level microdiscectomy for acute DP. Group 2 included patients with chronic low back pain and DDD. Discs were assessed by magnetic resonance imaging through Pfirmann grading, Schmorl nodes, Modic changes, and the total end-plate damage score for all the five lumbar discs. Results Group 1 (DP) had 91 patients and group 2 (DDD) had 133 patients. DP and DDD patients differed significantly in the number, extent, and severity of degeneration. DDD patients had a significantly higher number of degenerated discs than DP patients (p<.000). The incidence of multilevel and pan-lumbar degeneration was also significantly higher in DDD group. The pattern of degeneration also differed in both the groups. DDD patients had predominant upper lumbar involvement, whereas DP patients had mainly lower lumbar degeneration. Modic changes were more common in DP patients, especially at the prolapsed level. Modic changes were present in 37% of prolapsed levels compared with 9.9% of normal discs (p<.00). The total end-plate damage score had a positive correlation with disc degeneration in both the groups. Further the mean total end-plate damage score at prolapsed level was also significantly higher. Conclusion The results suggest that patients with disc prolapse, and those with back pain with DDD are clinically and radiologically different groups of patients with varying patterns, severity, and extent of disc degeneration. This is the first study in literature to compare and identify significant differences in these two commonly encountered patient groups. In patients with single-level DP, the majority of the other discs are nondegenerate, the lower lumbar spine is predominantly involved and the end-plate damage is higher. Patients with back pain and DDD have larger number of degenerate discs, early multilevel degeneration, and predominant upper lumbar degeneration. The knowledge that these two groups of patients are different clinically and radiologically is critical for our improved understanding of the disease and for future studies on disc degeneration and disc prolapse.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Elsevier Inc</pub><pmid>24231779</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.spinee.2013.10.042</doi><tpages>8</tpages></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 1529-9430 |
| ispartof | The spine journal, 2014-02, Vol.14 (2), p.300-307 |
| issn | 1529-9430 1878-1632 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1491058315 |
| source | MEDLINE; ScienceDirect Journals (5 years ago - present) |
| subjects | Acute Disease Adult Chronic Pain - diagnosis Chronic Pain - epidemiology Chronic Pain - pathology Diagnosis, Differential Disc degeneration Disc prolapse Diskectomy Female Humans Incidence Intervertebral Disc Degeneration - diagnosis Intervertebral Disc Degeneration - epidemiology Intervertebral Disc Degeneration - pathology Intervertebral Disc Displacement - diagnosis Intervertebral Disc Displacement - epidemiology Intervertebral Disc Displacement - pathology Low Back Pain - diagnosis Low Back Pain - epidemiology Low Back Pain - pathology Lumbar Vertebrae - pathology Lumbar Vertebrae - surgery Magnetic resonance imaging Magnetic Resonance Imaging - methods Male Middle Aged Orthopedics Patterns Prospective Studies Sciatica - epidemiology Sciatica - pathology Sciatica - surgery Severity of Illness Index Young Adult |
| title | Patterns of lumbar disc degeneration are different in degenerative disc disease and disc prolapse magnetic resonance imaging analysis of 224 patients |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-06T21%3A01%3A47IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Patterns%20of%20lumbar%20disc%20degeneration%20are%20different%20in%20degenerative%20disc%20disease%20and%20disc%20prolapse%20magnetic%20resonance%20imaging%20analysis%20of%20224%20patients&rft.jtitle=The%20spine%20journal&rft.au=Kanna,%20Rishi%20M.,%20MS,%20MRCS,%20FNB&rft.date=2014-02-01&rft.volume=14&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=300&rft.epage=307&rft.pages=300-307&rft.issn=1529-9430&rft.eissn=1878-1632&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.spinee.2013.10.042&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1491058315%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1491058315&rft_id=info:pmid/24231779&rft_els_id=S1529943013016471&rfr_iscdi=true |