The aim of this research was to study the most important problems in diagnosing a socially significant problem - osteochondrosis of the cervical spine. According to some authors, in the structure of disability and disability associated with pathology of the spine, diseases of the cervical spine occupy one of the leading positions. The paper analyzes data from 41 sources of literature on the pathogenesis and diagnosis of osteochondrosis of the cervical spine. Due to the complexity and ambiguity of the approaches to the diagnosis of osteochondrosis of the cervical spine, this paper analyzes the most important research methods in the diagnosis of this pathology. Attention is focused on the main pathogenetic prerequisites for the occurrence of pain. According to literature data, the main attention in the diagnosis of osteochondrosis of the cervical spine is given to the basic methods: clinical and neurological examination, where the severity of the disorders is determined using scales that include not only an assessment of the intensity of the pain syndrome, but also the determination of a number of neurological disorders. The authors propose the use of a DN4 questionnaire, LANSS scales, neurological impairment scales (N1S); radiation research methods, such as survey spondylography of the cervical spine in direct and lateral projections, functional spondylography of the cervical spine in the position of maximum flexion and extension, multispiral computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging data, and neurophysiological studies. Radiation research methods can determine pathological changes in the bone tissue itself. Magnetic resonance imaging indices make it possible to assess the degree of pathological changes in the soft tissue anatomical structures of the spinal canal and intervertebral discs. According to the literature, much attention is paid to functional research methods, in particular, electroneuromyography, which allows to assess the level and degree of damage to nerve fiber, the dynamics of the pathological process. Attention is paid to the allocation of marker indicators. All methods are significant, evidence-based, objective and modern and do not exclude the possibility of using data from other research methods. The analysis of the presented literature once again convinces clinicians of the ambiguity and heterogeneity of approaches to the issues of pathogenesis and diagnosis of the cervical spine, which requires further improvement of the proposed methods for clarifying and objectifying the pathological process. An important andjustified is a pathogeneti-cally grounded approach to their study.
Read full abstract