Facet joint hypertrophy is a misnomer: A retrospective study. Issue 24 (June 2018)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: An, Sang Joon; Seo, Mi Sook; Choi, Soo Il; Lim, Tae-Ha; Shin, So Jin; Kang, Keum Nae; Kim, Young Uk
• Other Names: Schaller. Bernhard section editor.
• Is Part Of: Medicine. Volume 97:Issue 24(2018)
• Publication Date: 2018-06
• Subjects: facet joint cross-sectional area -- facet joint hypertrophy -- facet joint thickness -- lumbar spinal canal stenosis; Medicine -- Periodicals; Medicine -- Periodicals; Médecine -- Périodiques; Geneeskunde; Medicine; Periodicals; Periodicals; 610.5
• DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000011090
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0025-7974

Abstract

Abstract : Abstract: One of the major causes of lumbar spinal canal stenosis (LSCS) has been considered facet joint hypertrophy (FJH). However, a previous study asserted that "FJH" is a misnomer because common facet joints are no smaller than degenerative facet joints; however, this hypothesis has not been effectively demonstrated. Therefore, in order to verify that FJH is a misnomer in patients with LSCS, we devised new morphological parameters that we called facet joint thickness (FJT) and facet joint cross-sectional area (FJA). We collected FJT and FJA data from 114 patients with LSCS. A total of 86 control subjects underwent lumbar magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) as part of routine medical examinations, and axial T2-weighted MRI images were obtained from all participants. We measured FJT by drawing a line along the facet area and then measuring the narrowest point at L4-L5. We measured FJA as the whole cross-sectional area of the facet joint at the stenotic L4-L5 level. The average FJT was 1.60 ± 0.36 mm in the control group and 1.11 ± 0.32 mm in the LSCS group. The average FJA was 14.46 ± 5.17 mm 2 in the control group and 9.31 ± 3.47 mm 2 in the LSCS group. Patients with LSCS had significantly lower FJTs ( P < .001) and FJAs ( P < .001). FJH, a misnomer, should be renamed facet joint area narrowing. Using this terminology would eliminate confusion in descriptions of the facet joint.