Structured image diagnosis of vertebral body degeneration and disc damage - Binary image criteria and comparison for systematic image analysis in occupational diseases 2108/2110. / Strukturierte Bild-Befundung von Wirbelkörperdegeneration und Bandscheibenschäden ­ Binäre Bildkriterien und Vergleichs-Bilder für die systematische Bildanalyse bei den Berufskrankheiten 2108 und 2110.

BACKGROUND: Occupationally related limitations of earning capacity can be recognized under social legislation and may be subject to compensation ("reduction in earning capacity"). For this purpose, legislators have defined a list of occupational diseases ("BK list"). Recognition of an occupational disease requires a legal assessment procedure based on a medical appraisal. The aim of the assessment is to prove the "causality" and the "causality giving rise to liability". METHOD: In addition to clinical findings and workplace analyses, imaging methods (projection radiography, MRI) are primarily used to substantiate liability. These methods enable proof of load-conforming damage patterns for occupational diseases 2108/2110 (damage to intervertebral discs). RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: In addition to the legal background, the following review article primarily presents the image criteria for load-conforming damage patterns of the spine. On the basis of the consensus paper on the "Assessment of occupational disc diseases of the lumbar spine", image criteria are assigned to age-atypical grades of findings, and "typical constellations of findings" are defined for vibration (BK 2108) or lifting (BK 2110) loads. The aim of Part 1 is to explain the image criteria of the comparative images presented as image plates in Part 2 and thus to present a reference catalog of findings. KEY STATEMENTS: · Occupational diseases are defined by legislators in the "List of Occupational Diseases".. · For occupational intervertebral disc diseases (BK 2108/2110), constellations of findings are defined.. · In the context of imaging diagnostics, a large number of image criteria are used.. · Part 1 explains the basics.. · Part 2 provides the image criteria on the basis of "comparative images" as a reference catalog.. CITATION FORMAT: · Braunschweig R, Kildal D, Meyer-Clement M et al. Structured image diagnosis of vertebral body degeneration and disc damage - Binary image criteria and comparison for systematic image analysis in occupational diseases 2108/2110. Fortschr Röntgenstr 2024; 196: 347 - 353.

Structured image diagnosis of vertebral body degeneration and intervertebral disc damage - Binary image criteria and comparison for systematic image analysis for occupational diseases 2108 and 2110. / Strukturierte Bild-Befundung von Wirbelkörperdegeneration und Bandscheibenschäden ­ Binäre Bildkriterien und Vergleichsbilder für die systematische Bildanalyse bei den Berufskrankheiten 2108 und 2110.

BACKGROUND: Job-related limitations of earning capacity are eligible for recognition under social legislation and may be subject to compensation (see Part 1). METHOD: For the recognition of an occupational disease (BK), diagnostic imaging is required as part of the legal determination procedure for occupational diseases 2108/2110 ("occupational disc disease"). The focus is on image criteria on X-ray images and MRI examinations. In a consensus paper under the guidance of the German Social Accident Insurance Institutions from 2005, the characteristic patterns are defined and explained extensively and summarized in typical occupation-related constellations. This article presents representative image examples as a reference system for expert reporting as far as the typical patterns from the consensus paper are concerned. CONCLUSION: In Part 2, comparison images with the typical findings of the vertebral bodies and intervertebral discs according to occupational diseases are systematically presented, explained, and offered as a reference system for expert assessment. The image criteria can be used as "evidence by eye" (Heuck) in the recognition procedure. KEY POINTS: · Occupational diseases are defined by the legislator in the "List of Occupational Diseases".. · For occupational intervertebral disc diseases (OD nos. 2108/2110), constellations of findings are defined.. · Within the scope of diagnostic imaging, a large number of image criteria are used.. · Part 1 explains the basics and the legal background.. · Part 2 provides the image criteria on the basis of "comparison images" as a reference catalog.. CITATION FORMAT: · Braunschweig R, Kildal D, Meyer-Clement M et al. Structured image diagnosis of vertebral body degeneration and intervertebral disc damage - Binary image criteria and comparison for systematic image analysis for occupational diseases 2108 and 2110. Fortschr Röntgenstr 2024; DOI: 10.1055/a-2224-9100.

Measurement of Intervertebral Disc Heights in the Lumbar Spine. Comparison of X-Ray and Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Method of Measurement and Determination of Inter-observer Reliability. / Messung der Bandscheibenhöhen in der Lendenwirbelsäule. Vergleich von Proiektionsradiographie und Kernspintomografie, Messmethode und Bestimmung der Inter-Observer-Reliabilität.

PURPOSE: Retrospective radiological examination (X-ray and MRI) aims to investigate the diagnostic value of various methods of measurement with regard to the determination of the intervertebral disc heights of the lumbar spine. METHODS: Of 130 patients without detectable damage to the intervertebral discs, the X-ray and MRI images of the lumbar spine were evaluated. The measurements were made either in the center line (Hurxthal) or in the 2-point method according to Dabbs or in the 3-point method according to Fyllos. RESULTS: The average intervertebral disc height for all measured segments was 8.8 mm (SD 1.4 mm). In the Hurxthal measurement, the significantly (p < 0.001) highest values were measured with an average of 9.1 mm (SD 1.3 mm). The average readings for the Fyllos method were 7.5 mm (SD 1.2 mm) and according to Dabbs 6.7 mm (SD 1.2 mm). The measured values of Observer I were on average 1.2 mm (SD 0.3 mm) smaller than those of Observer II (p < 0.001). The highest interobserver correlation was found in the measurements in projection radiography in the AP method according to Dabbs and Fyllos. The measured values in men were 0.5 mm (SD 0.01 mm) larger than in women (p < 0.001), regardless of the method. The height of the intervertebral discs increases significantly until the age of 40, but beyond the age of 40, the height of the intervertebral discs either remains constant or falls off slightly, but not significantly. The lordosis angle of the lumbar spine and the concavity index of the vertebral bodies showed no correlation with the measured disc heights. CONCLUSIONS: The radiological measurements to determine the intervertebral disc height have only moderate reliability. The results of X-rays are superior to those of MRI examination. The most accurate results are provided by measurements based on exact landmarks of the vertebral bodies. The method according to Dabbs seems to be the most accurate at the moment. There is no clear age-atypical chondrosis in patients without intervertebral disc damage.