Objective: To improve the understanding of lumbosacralradiculitis by analyzing the clinical, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and neuroeletrophysiological characteristics of disease.
Methods: The clinical, MRI and neuroeletrophysiological data of 14 patients diagnosed as lumbosacralradiculitis were retrospectively analyzed.
Results: The predominant age of onset was in the forth decade. Each patient had bilateral or unilateral lower extremity numbness and weakness of variable severity, including muscle atrophy (n = 5) and decreased sensation in L4-S1 nerve root territory (n = 9). Lower extremity tendon reflexes decreased or became absent in all patients. Urinary and defecation disorders were seen in 3 patients. Lumbosacral MRI showed lumbosacral meninges and nerve root enhancement in 4 patients. Cerebrospinal fluid analysis revealed elevated white blood cell (30×10(6)/L) (n = 1) and increased protein content (n = 12) (450-1 000 mg/L, n = 7; 1 000-2 000 mg/L, n = 3; 2 000-3 000 mg/L, n = 2). Needle electromyography (EMG) demonstrated neurogenic damage in 13 patients. Motor nerve conduction study showed decreased motor never conduction velocity (MCV) (n = 5), decreased compound muscle action potential (CMAP) amplitude (n = 12), CMAP absent at right side (n = 2) and left side (n = 1) among 22 peroneal nerves; decreased MCV (n = 6), decreased CMAP amplitude (n = 6), CMAP absent at right side (n = 2) and left side (n = 1) among 23 tibial nerves. F-wave was performed for 11 patients and abnormal in 6 patients, with prolonged latency and reduced occurrence rate in right common peroneal nerve (n = 2), left prolonged latency (n = 3) and right tibial nerve (n = 1) respectively. Bilateral sural nerve conduction study revealed no abnormality.
Conclusion: Diagnosing lumbosacralradiculitis is not easy based on lumbosacral MRI. And neuroelectrophysiological study may provide more valuable information in verifying the location of lesions and judging the damage extent of lumbosacralradiculitis.