Download PDF
Evid Based Spine Care J 2011; 2(4): 27-33
DOI: 10.1055/s-0031-1274754
Systematic review
© AOSpine International Stettbachstrasse 6 8600 Dübendorf, Switzerland

Does patient history and physical examination predict MRI proven cauda equina syndrome?

Jeremy Fairbank
1   Nuffield Orthopaedic Centre, Oxford, UK
,
Robin Hashimoto
2   Spectrum Research Inc, Tacoma, WA, USA
,
Andrew Dailey
3   University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA
,
Alpesh A Patel
3   University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA
,
Joseph R Dettori
2   Spectrum Research Inc, Tacoma, WA, USA
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

Publication Date:
16 February 2012 (online)

   Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Study design: Systematic review.

Study rationale: While magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is used as the diagnostic gold standard for cauda equina syndrome (CES), many MRI scans obtained from patients presenting with signs and/or symptoms of CES do not reveal concordant pathology. As a result, the role of the history and physical examination remains unclear when determining which patients require emergent MRI.

Objective or clinical question: Are there elements from the history or physical examination that are associated with CES as established by MRI?

Methods: A systematic review of the literature was undertaken for articles published through April 13, 2011. PubMed, Cochrane, National Guideline Clearinghouse Databases, and bibliographies of key articles were searched. Two independent reviewers reviewed articles. Inclusion and exclusion criteria were set and each article was subject to a predefined quality-rating scheme.

Results: We identified four articles meeting our inclusion criteria. All studies evaluated patients with symptoms suggestive of CES and compared symptoms and/or signs with findings at MRI. The mean prevalence of CES as diagnosed by MRI ranged from 14%–48% of patients. No symptoms or signs reported by more than one study showed high sensitivity and specificity, and all likelihood ratios were low. Symptoms included back/low back pain, bilateral sciatica, bladder retention, bladder incontinence, frequent urination, decreased urinary sensation, and bowel incontinence; signs included saddle numbness and reduced anal tone.

Conclusions: There is low evidence that individual symptoms or signs from the patient history or clinical examination, respectively, can be used to diagnose CES. Additional prospective studies are needed to evaluate whether any single and/or combination of symptoms are associated with a positive diagnosis of CES.

 

  • REFERENCES

  • 1 Balasubramanian K, Kalsi P, Greenough CG. 2010; Reliability of clinical assessment in diagnosing cauda equina syndrome. Br J Neurosurg 24 (4) 383-386
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Bell DA, Collie D, Statham PF. 2007; Cauda equina syndrome: what is the correlation between clinical assessment and MRI scanning?. Br J Neurosurg 21 (2) 201-203
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Domen PM, Hofman PA, van Santbrink H. 2009; Predictive value of clinical characteristics in patients with suspected cauda equina syndrome. Eur J Neurol 16 (3) 416-419
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Rooney A, Statham PF, Stone J. 2009; Cauda equina syndrome with normal MR imaging. J Neurol 256 (5) 721-725
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar