Imaging Pediatric Spondylolysis: A Systematic Review.
METHODS
A systematic review.


OBJECTIVE
The aim of this study was to provide an evidence-based recommendation for when and how to employ imaging studies when diagnosing back pain thought to be caused by spondylolysis in pediatric patients.


BACKGROUND
Spondylolysis is a common structural cause of back pain in pediatric patients. The radiologic methods and algorithms used to diagnose spondylolysis are inconsistent among practitioners.


METHODS
A literature review was performed in PubMed and Cochrane databases using the search terms "spondylolysis," "pediatric," "adolescent," "juvenile," "young," "lumbar," "MRI," "bone scan," "CT," and "SPECT." After inclusion criteria were applied, 13 articles pertaining to diagnostic imaging of pediatric spondylolysis were analyzed.


RESULTS
Ten papers included sensitivity calculations for comparing imaging performance. The average sensitivity of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) with computed tomography (CT) as the standard of reference was 81.4%. When compared with single-photon emission CT (SPECT), the average sensitivity of CT was 85% and the sensitivity of MRI was 80%. Thirteen studies made a recommendation as to how best to perform diagnostic imaging of patients with clinically suspected spondylolysis. When compared with two-view plain films, bone scans had seven to nine times the effective radiation dose, while four-view plain films and CT were approximately double. Of the diagnostic methods examined, MRI was the most expensive followed by CT, bone scan, four-view plain films, and two-view plain films.


CONCLUSIONS
Due to their efficacy, low cost, and low radiation exposure, we find two-view plain films to be the best initial study. With unusual presentations or refractory courses, practitioners should pursue advanced imaging. MRI should be used in early diagnosis and CT in more persistent courses. However, the lack of rigorous studies makes it difficult to formulate concrete recommendations.


METHODS
3.
University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics Department of Orthopaedics and Rehabilitation, Iowa City, IA.
Josef N
JN
Tofte
University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics Department of Orthopaedics and Rehabilitation, Iowa City, IA.
Tyler L
TL
CarlLee
University of Iowa Roy J. and Lucille A. Carver College of Medicine, Iowa City, IA.
Andrew J
AJ
Holte
University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics Department of Orthopaedics and Rehabilitation, Iowa City, IA.
Sean E
SE
Sitton
University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics Department of Orthopaedics and Rehabilitation, Iowa City, IA.
Stuart L
SL
Weinstein
D001416:Back Pain / Q000175:diagnosis*; D042241:Early Diagnosis; D006801:Humans; D008279:Magnetic Resonance Imaging / Q000191:economics / Q000379:methods; D010372:Pediatrics; D011859:Radiography / Q000191:economics / Q000379:methods; D013169:Spondylolysis / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging*
Altaf F, Heran MKS, Wilson LF. Back pain in children and adolescents. Bone Joint J 2014; 96-B:717–723.
Cavalier R, Herman MJ, Cheung EV, et al. Spondylolysis and spondylolisthesis in children and adolescents: I. Diagnosis, natural history, and nonsurgical management. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 2006; 14:417–424.
Campbell RSD, Grainger AJ, Hide IG, et al. Juvenile spondylolysis: a comparative analysis of CT, SPECT and MRI. Skeletal Radiol 2005; 34:63–73.
Herman MJ, Pizzutillo PD. Spondylolysis and spondylolisthesis in the child and adolescent: a new classification. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2005; 434:46–54.
Gehweiler JA, Daffner RH. Low back pain: the controversy of radiologic evaluation. AJR Am J Roentgenol 1983; 140:109–112.
Miller R, Beck NA, Sampson NR, et al. Imaging modalities for low back pain in children: a review of spondyloysis and undiagnosed back pain. J Pediatr Orthop 2013; 33:282–288.
Armstrong P, Ringertz H, Bischof Delaloye A. Referral guidelines for imaging. European Commission Directorate-General for the Environment, Luxembourg. 2001:44–58.
Yang J, Servaes S, Edwards K, et al. Prevalence of stress reaction in the pars interarticularis in pediatric patients with new-onset lower back pain. Clin Nucl Med 2013; 38:110–114.
Dunn AJ, Campbell RSD, Mayor PE, et al. Radiological findings and healing patterns of incomplete stress fractures of the pars interarticularis. Skeletal Radiol 2008; 37:443–450.
Rush JK, Astur N, Scott S, et al. Use of magnetic resonance imaging in the evaluation of spondylolysis. J Pediatr Orthop 2015; 35:271–275.
Bhatia NN, Chow G, Timon SJ, et al. Diagnostic modalities for the evaluation of pediatric back pain: a prospective study. J Pediatr Orthop 2008; 28:230–233.
Kobayashi A, Kobayashi T, Kato K, et al. Diagnosis of radiographically occult lumbar spondylolysis in young athletes by magnetic resonance imaging. Am J Sports Med 2013; 41:169–176.
Ganiyusufoglu AK, Onat L, Karatoprak O, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging versus computed tomography in stress fractures of the lumbar spine. Clin Radiol 2010; 65:902–907.
Yamaguchi KT, Skaggs DL, Acevedo DC, et al. Spondylolysis is frequently missed by MRI in adolescents with back pain. J Child Orthop 2012; 6:237–240.
Goda Y, Sakai T, Sakamaki T, et al. Analysis of MRI signal changes in the adjacent pedicle of adolescent patients with fresh lumbar spondylolysis. Eur spine J 2014; 23:1892–1895.
Sairyo K, Katoh S, Takata Y, et al. MRI signal changes of the pedicle as an indicator for early diagnosis of spondylolysis in children and adolescents: a clinical and biomechanical study. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 2006; 31:206–211.
Masci L, Pike J, Malara F, et al. Use of the one-legged hyperextension test and magnetic resonance imaging in the diagnosis of active spondylolysis. Br J Sports Med 2006; 40:940–946. discussion 946.
Gregory PL, Batt ME, Kerslake RW, et al. Single photon emission computerized tomography and reverse gantry computerized tomography findings in patients with back pain investigated for spondylolysis. Clin J Sport Med 2005; 15:79–86.