Diagnostic criteria for the clinical syndrome of internal disc disruption: Are they reliable?

References

• Aprill C, Bogduk N. High-intensity zone: a diagnostic sign of painful lumbar disc on magnetic resonance imaging. Br J Radiol 1992; 65: 361–9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Blumenthal S L, Baker J, Dossett A, Selby D K. The role of anterior lumbar fusion for internal disc disruption. Spine 1988; 13: 566–9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bogduk N. The lumbar disc and low back pain. Neurosurg Clin N Am 1991; 2: 791–806
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Brightbill T C, Pile N, Eichelberger R P, Whitman M, Jr. Normal magnetic resonance imaging and abnormal discography in lumbar disc disruption. Spine 1994; 19: 1075–7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cooke P M, Lutz G E. Internal disc disruption and axial back pain in the athlete. Phys Med Rehabil Clin N Am 2000; 11: 837–65
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Johnson P H. Internal disc disruption. J Ark Med Soc 1985; 81: 425–8
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Karasek M, Bogduk N. Twelve-month follow-up of a controlled trial of intradiscal thermal anuloplasty for back pain due to internal disc disruption. Spine 2000; 25: 2601–7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lam K S, Carlin D, Mulholland R C. Lumbar disc high-intensity zone: the value and significance of provocative discography in the determination of the discogenic pain source. Eur Spine J 2000; 9: 36–41
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vamvanij V, Fredrickson B E, Thorpe J M, Stadnick M E, Yuan H A. Surgical treatment of internal disc disruption: an outcome study of four fusion techniques. J Spinal Disord 1998; 11: 375–82
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Vanharanta H, Sachs B L, Spivey M A, Guyer R D, Hochschuler S H, Rashbaum R F, et al. The relationship of pain provocation to lumbar disc deterioration as seen by CT/discography. Spine 1987; 12: 295–8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walsh T R, Weinstein J N, Spratt K F, Lehmann T R, Aprill C, Sayre H. Lumbar discography in normal subjects. A controlled, prospective study. J Bone J Surg Am 1990; 72: 1081–8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Block A R, Vanharanta H, Ohnmeiss D D, Guyer R D. Discographic pain report. Influence of psychological factors. Spine 1996; 21: 344–8
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bogduk N, Modic M T. Controversy; Lumbar discography. Spine 1996; 21: 402–4
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carragee E J, Paragioudakis S J, Khurana S. Lumbar high-intensity zone and discography in subjects without low back problems. Spine 2000; 25: 2987–92
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carragee E J, Tanner C M, Khurana S, et al. The rates of false-positive lumbar discography in select patients without low back symptoms. Spine 2000; 25: 1373–80
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carragee E J, Tanner C M, Yang B, Brito J L, Truong T. False-positive findings on lumbar discography. Reliability of subjective concordance assessment during provocative disc injection. Spine 1999; 24: 2542–7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clifford J R. Lumbar discography: an outdated procedure [letter]. J Neurosurg 1986; 64: 686
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Holt E P. The question of lumbar discography. J Bone J Surg Am 1968; 50: 720–6
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rankine J J, Gill K P, Hutchinson C E, Ross E R, Williamson J B. The clinical significance of the high-intensity zone on lumbar spine magnetic resonance imaging. Spine 1999; 24: 1913–19
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nachemson A. Lumbar discography—where are we today?. Spine 1989; 14: 555–7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hanley E N. The indications for lumbar spinal fusion with and without instrumentation. Spine 1995; 20: 143S–53S
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rhyne A L, Smith S E, Darden B V, Wood K E. Outcome of unoperated discogram-positive low back pain. Spine 1995; 20: 1997–2000
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Saal J A, Saal J S. Intradiscal electrothermal treatment for chronic discogenic low back pain: prospective outcome study with minimum 1-year follow-up. Spine 2000; 25: 2622–7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schwarzer A C, Aprill C N, Derby R, Fortin J, Kine G, Bogduk N. The prevalence and clinical features of internal disc disruption in patients with chronic low back pain. Spine 1995; 20: 1878–83
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Simmons J W, McMillin J N, Emery S F, Kimmich S J. Intradiscal steroids: a prospective double-blind clinical trial. Spine 1992; 17: 172S–5S
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• National Library of Medicine. Entrez-PubMed 2001, Available at http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/PubMed/(accessed 19 July 2001)
   Google Scholar
• Crock H V. A reappraisal of intervertebral disc lesions. Med J Aust 1970; 1: 983–9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kirkaldy-Willis W H, Wedge J H, Yong-Hing K, Reilly J. Pathology and pathogenesis of lumbar spondylosis and stenosis. Spine 1978; 3: 319–28
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Crock H V. Internal disc disruption. A challenge to disc prolapse fifty years on. Spine 1986; 11: 650–3
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Linson M A, Williams H. Anterior and combined anteroposterior fusion for lumber disc pain. A preliminary study. Spine 1991; 16: 143–5
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Newman M H, Grinstead G L. Anterior lumbar interbody fusion for internal disc disruption. Spine 1992; 17: 831–3
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Blumenthal S L. Normal magnetic resonance imaging and abnormal discography in lumbar disc disruption. Spine 1995; 20: 120
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Selby D K. Surgically proven internal disc disruption. Spine 1995; 20: 120
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• McFadden J W. The stress lumbar discogram. Spine 1988; 13: 931–3
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Milette P C, Fontaine S, Lepanto L, Cardinal E, Breton G. Differentiating lumbar disc protrusions, disc bulges, and discs with normal contour but abnormal signal intensity. Magnetic resonance imaging with discographic correlations. Spine 1999; 24: 44–53
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smith B M, Hurwitz E L, Solsberg D, et al. Interobserver reliability of detecting lumbar intervertebral disc high-intensity zone on magnetic resonance imaging and association of high-intensity zone with pain and anular disruption. Spine 1998; 23: 2074–80
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• IASP Task Force on Taxonomy. Classification of chronic pain, 2nd edn, H Merskey, N Bogduk. IASP Press, Seattle 1994; 209–14
   Google Scholar
• Easthope G, Tranter B, Gill G. Normal medical practice of referring patients for complementary therapies among Australian general practitioners. Compl Ther Med 2000; 8: 226–33
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grob D, Humke T. Translaminar screw fixation in the lumbar spine: technique, indications, results. Eur Spine J 1998; 7: 178–86
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Hall K, Giles-Corti B. Complementary therapies and the general practitioner. A survey of Perth GPs. Aust Fam Physician 2000; 29: 602–6
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Pirotta M V, Cohen M M, Kotsirilos V, Farish S J. Complementary therapies: have they become accepted in general practice?. Med J Aust 2000; 172: 105–9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barrett S. 2001, Available at http://www.quackwatch.com/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/altwary.html. Be wary of “alternative” health methods [online]. Quackwatch. (accessed 2 August 2001)
   Google Scholar