Orthopaedic surgery · 2022
Relationships between Paraspinal Muscle and Spinopelvic Sagittal Balance in Patients with Lumbar Spinal Stenosis.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Wang Wei, Sun Zhuoran, Li Weishi, Chen Zhongqiang
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the relationships between measurements of paraspinal muscle and spinopelvic sagittal parameters and the predictive value of lumbar indentation value (LIV) on sagittal balance in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis.
METHODS: It was a retrospective study. We collected the data of 110 patients, who were diagnosed as lumbar spinal stenosis from December 2018 to May 2019. The total cross-sectional area (tCSA), functional cross-sectional area (fCSA), and fatty infiltration (FI) of paraspinal muscle were measured. The spinopelvic sagittal parameters were also measured, including sagittal vertical axis (SVA), pelvic incidence (PI), pelvic tilt (PT), sacral slope (SS), lumbar lordosis (LL), thoracic kyphosis (TK), and PI minus LL (PI-LL). Correlations between measurements of paraspinal muscle and sagittal parameters were investigated by Pearson correlation analysis. The multiple linear regression analysis was used to investigate the LIV, age, gender, and BMI for assessing spinopelvic sagittal balance. Receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curve was used to find out the most optimum cut-off point of LIV for evaluating SVA.
RESULTS: There were 42 males and 68 females in this study and the mean age was 59.9 ± 10.9 years old. By Pearson correlation analysis, MF tCSA showed significant association with LL (r = 0.455, P < 0.01) and PI-LL (r = -0.286, P < 0.01). MF fCSA had a significant correlation with LL (r = 0.326, P < 0.01) and PI-LL (r = -0.209, P < 0.05). LIV was also significantly correlated to spinopelvic sagittal parameters, including SVA (r = -0.226, P < 0.05), LL (r = 0.576, P < 0.01), TK (r = 0.305, P < 0.01), and PI-LL (r = -0.379, P < 0.01). By multiple linear regression analysis, LIV was independently associated with sagittal parameters, including PI-LL and SVA. The cut-off value of LIV for SVA ≤ 50 mm was 10.5 mm (AUC = 0.641). According to the best cut-off value, patients were divided into two groups. For patients with LIV ≤ 10.5 mm, the percentage of SVA ≤ 50 mm was 54.5% (18/33), while it was 83.1% (64/77) for patients with LIV >10.5 mm.
CONCLUSIONS: As a new index to evaluate paraspinal muscle atrophy, the LIV was independently correlated to spinopelvic sagittal balance. Degeneration of paraspinal muscle was associated with spinopelvic sagittal balance.
METHODS: It was a retrospective study. We collected the data of 110 patients, who were diagnosed as lumbar spinal stenosis from December 2018 to May 2019. The total cross-sectional area (tCSA), functional cross-sectional area (fCSA), and fatty infiltration (FI) of paraspinal muscle were measured. The spinopelvic sagittal parameters were also measured, including sagittal vertical axis (SVA), pelvic incidence (PI), pelvic tilt (PT), sacral slope (SS), lumbar lordosis (LL), thoracic kyphosis (TK), and PI minus LL (PI-LL). Correlations between measurements of paraspinal muscle and sagittal parameters were investigated by Pearson correlation analysis. The multiple linear regression analysis was used to investigate the LIV, age, gender, and BMI for assessing spinopelvic sagittal balance. Receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curve was used to find out the most optimum cut-off point of LIV for evaluating SVA.
RESULTS: There were 42 males and 68 females in this study and the mean age was 59.9 ± 10.9 years old. By Pearson correlation analysis, MF tCSA showed significant association with LL (r = 0.455, P < 0.01) and PI-LL (r = -0.286, P < 0.01). MF fCSA had a significant correlation with LL (r = 0.326, P < 0.01) and PI-LL (r = -0.209, P < 0.05). LIV was also significantly correlated to spinopelvic sagittal parameters, including SVA (r = -0.226, P < 0.05), LL (r = 0.576, P < 0.01), TK (r = 0.305, P < 0.01), and PI-LL (r = -0.379, P < 0.01). By multiple linear regression analysis, LIV was independently associated with sagittal parameters, including PI-LL and SVA. The cut-off value of LIV for SVA ≤ 50 mm was 10.5 mm (AUC = 0.641). According to the best cut-off value, patients were divided into two groups. For patients with LIV ≤ 10.5 mm, the percentage of SVA ≤ 50 mm was 54.5% (18/33), while it was 83.1% (64/77) for patients with LIV >10.5 mm.
CONCLUSIONS: As a new index to evaluate paraspinal muscle atrophy, the LIV was independently correlated to spinopelvic sagittal balance. Degeneration of paraspinal muscle was associated with spinopelvic sagittal balance.