Diagnostic Imaging in Pain Management

  • Timothy Malhotra


When diagnoses in pain management are uncertain and information scant, radiologic imaging can be used to make the unseen seen. Differentials may be narrowed, decisions made more certain, and therapy commenced with greater effect. As powerful as it may be, imaging is no substitute for clinical examination and diagnoses; therapeutics should not be based solely on a radiologic result but in conjunction with the clinical findings. Much can be found if one looks, but if it does not hurt, is it of significance, and does it need to be treated?


Magnetic Resonance Imaging Contrast Agent Plain Radiograph Complex Regional Pain Syndrome Prosthetic Joint Infection 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Bogduk N. Diagnostic procedures in chronic pain. In: Jensen TS, Wilson PR, Rice ASC, editors. Chronic pain. London: Arnold; 2003. pp. 125–44.Google Scholar
  2. Cosgrove DO. Ultrasound: general principles. In: Adam A, Dixon AK, editors. Adam Grainger & Allison’s diagnostic radiology. Philadelphia, PA: Elsevier; 2008.Google Scholar
  3. Eldevik OP, Haughton VM. Risk factors in complications of aqueous myelography. Radiology 1978;128(2):415–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Gruener G, Dyck PJ. Quantitative sensory testing: methodology, applications, and future directions. J Clin Neurophysiol. 1994;11(6):568–83.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Kleefield J. Radiological evaluation of spinal disease. In: Warfield C, Bajwa ZJ, editors. Principles and practice of pain medicine. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill; 2004. pp. 83–111.Google Scholar
  6. Love C. Radionuclide bone imaging: an illustrative review. Radiographics 2003;23(2):341–58.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Mettler F. Essentials of radiology. Philadelphia, PA: Elsevier Saunders; 2005.Google Scholar
  8. Modic MT. Lumbar herniated disk disease and canal stenosis: prospective evaluation by surface coil MR, CT, and myelography. Am J Roentgenol. 1986;147(4):757–65.Google Scholar
  9. Nagoya S. Diagnosis of peri-prosthetic infection at the hip using triple-phase bone scintigraphy. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2008;90(2):140–4.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Prince MR, Arnoldus C, Frisoli JK. Nephrotoxicity of high-dose gadolinium compared with iodinated contrast. J Magn Reson Imaging. 1996;6(1):162–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Shy ME. Quantitative sensory testing: report of the Therapeutics and Technology Assessment Subcommittee of the American Academy of Neurology. Neurology 2003;60(6):898–904.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Siddiqi NH. Contrast medium reactions, recognition and treatment. Available from: Accessed 11 Feb 2008.
  13. Unknown. DCMRC-Contraindications to MRI. [Web Page] 2009. Available from: Accessed 27 Feb 2009.
  14. Unknown. Important safety information for drug delivery systems. [Web Page] 2009. Available from: Accessed 26 Feb 2009.
  15. Unknown. Information for healthcare professionals gadolinium-based contrast agents for magnetic resonance imaging (marketed as Magnevist, MultiHance, Omniscan, OptiMARK, ProHance) [Web Page 2009; FDA ALERT]. Available from: Accessed 28 Feb 2009.
  16. Wilder RP, Sethi S. Overuse injuries: tendinopathies, stress fractures, compartment syndrome, and shin splints. Clin Sports Med. 2004;23(1):55–81, vi.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Wilkinson ID, Paley MNJ. Magnetic resonance imaging: basic principles. In: Grainger & Allison’s diagnostic radiology. Philadelphia, PA: Churchill Livingstone; 2008.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Timothy Malhotra
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Anesthesiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer CenterWeill Cornell College of MedicineNew YorkUSA

Personalised recommendations