Retrospective Study
Copyright ©2014 Baishideng Publishing Group Inc.
World J Clin Cases. Dec 16, 2014; 2(12): 883-887
Published online Dec 16, 2014. doi: 10.12998/wjcc.v2.i12.883
Table 1 Demographics of the 100 patients of the study along with the imaging features which were evaluated on the respective magnetic resonance imaging studies
ParameterSubjects with CLSSControl subjectsP
Subjects5248-
Age38 ± 1038 ± 80.4930
Sex (males/females)28/2422/260.2742
Average mid-sagittal thecal sac diameter1.31 ± 0.131.51 ± 0.18
Circumferential annular bulges59 (1.13 ± 0.95)35 (0.73 ± 0.79)0.01161
Shallow annular bulges80 (1.54 ± 1.06)47 (0.98 ± 0.93)0.00311
Foraminal disc herniations31 (0.60 ± 0.82)13 (0.27 ± 0.54)0.01111
Central/paracental disc herniations22 (0.42 ± 0.70)15 (0.31 ± 0.55)0.1917
Epidural lipomatosis33 (0.63 ± 1.09)17 (0.35 ± 0.76)0.0701
Schmorl’s nodes24 (0.46 ± 1.00)13 (0.27 ± 0.68)0.1352
Spondylolisthesis53 (1.02 ± 0.96)29 (0.60 ± 0.71)0.00811
Pars defects0 (0.00 ± 0.00)2 (0.04 ± 0.20)0.0699
Annular tears56 (1.08 ± 1.01)25 (0.52 ± 0.80)0.00041
Anterior disc herniation63 (1.21 ± 1.16)25 (1.51 ± 0.18)< 0.00011
Posterior elements stress reaction4 (0.08 ± 0.33)2 (0.04 ± 0.20)0.2644