Comparing MRI Spines in Low Back Pain and Neurogenic Claudication 1.0
Research type
Research Study
Full title
Comparing magnetic resonance imaging of the lumbar spine between patients with neurogenic claudication and low back pain.
IRAS ID
235787
Contact name
Charles Hutchinson
Contact email
Sponsor organisation
University Hospitals Coventry and Warwickshire
Duration of Study in the UK
0 years, 4 months, 0 days
Research summary
Neurogenic claudication describes a syndrome of buttock or leg pain that is provoked by upright exercise and relieved by bending forward or sitting. This is often accompanied by narrowing of the spinal canal in the lower back, putting pressure on the nerves connecting the spinal cord and the muscles and skin of the legs. Where both neurogenic claudication and narrowing of the spinal canal are present this is known as symptomatic lumbar spinal stenosis and this is now the most common reason for spinal surgery in the over 65s. The narrowing of the canal can be assessed by MRI scanning, but the best means of measuring this narrowing and the threshold at which the narrowing becomes significant is not known.
The Better Outcomes in Older People trial (BOOST) is a currently recruiting randomised controlled trial which aims to compare the effect of a new physiotherapy regime for the treatment of neurogenic claudication compared to current non-operative treatment. As part of this, all participants in the BOOST trial are having an MRI of their lower spine. The current proposal aims to recruit a population of patients who have been referred by their GP for an MRI scan for lower back pain but who do not have neurogenic claudication. It is hoped that by comparing various MRI measurements of the spinal canal between the low back pain and neurogenic claudication groups, the measurement that best separates them and its optimum threshold for doing this can be established. The full clinical importance of this measurement would be established by further work, both within the BOOST trial and potentially further studies.
REC name
London - Chelsea Research Ethics Committee
REC reference
18/LO/1367
Date of REC Opinion
27 Jul 2018
REC opinion
Favourable Opinion