| Literature DB >> 29281728 |
Ervin Poorghasamians1, Patricia C Aggabao1, Tishya A L Wren2, Skorn Ponrartana1, Vicente Gilsanz1,2,3.
Abstract
The degree of vertebral wedging, a key structural characteristic of spinal curvatures, has recently been found to be negatively related to vertebral cross-sectional area (CSA). The purpose of this longitudinal study was to examine the relation between vertebral cross-sectional growth and vertebral wedging progression within the immature lumbar spine. Using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), we analyzed the potential association between increases in lumbar vertebral CSA and changes in L5 vertebral wedging in 27 healthy adolescent girls (ages 9-13 years) twice within a two-year period. Vertebral CSA growth was negatively associated with changes in posteroanterior vertebral wedging (r = -0.61; p = 0.001). Multiple regression analysis showed that this relation was independent of gains in age, height, and weight. When compared to the 14 girls whose vertebral wedging progressed, the 13 subjects whose vertebral wedging decreased had significantly greater vertebral cross-sectional growth (0.39 ± 0.25 vs. 0.75 ± 0.23 cm2; p = 0.001); in contrast, there were no significant differences in increases in age, height, or weight between the two groups. Changes in posteroanterior vertebral wedging and the degree of lumbar lordosis (LL) positively correlated (r = 0.56, p = 0.002)-an association that persisted even after adjusting for gains in age, height, and weight. We concluded that in the immature skeleton, vertebral cross-sectional growth is an important determinant of the plasticity of the vertebral body; regression of L5 vertebral wedging is associated with greater lumbar vertebral cross-sectional growth, while progression is the consequence of lesser cross-sectional growth.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2017 PMID: 29281728 PMCID: PMC5745000 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0190225
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Age, anthropometric, and MRI measurements of lumbar spine morphology in 27 healthy girls at baseline and follow-up.
| Baseline | Follow-Up | Change | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age ( | 11.2 | ± | 1.30 | 12.4 | ± | 1.27 | 1.22 | ± | 0.09 | <0.0001 |
| Height ( | 147.9 | ± | 9.60 | 154.2 | ± | 8.42 | 6.39 | ± | 2.31 | <0.0001 |
| Weight ( | 41.7 | ± | 10.4 | 48.8 | ± | 11.4 | 7.14 | ± | 3.44 | <0.0001 |
| Lumbar Vertebral CSA ( | 7.96 | ± | 1.04 | 8.52 | ± | 1.07 | 0.56 | ± | 0.30 | <0.0001 |
| Vertebral Wedging ( | 13.1 | ± | 3.01 | 13.2 | ± | 2.53 | 0.11 | ± | 2.97 | 0.849 |
| Lumbar Lordosis ( | 26.6 | ± | 8.93 | 28.9 | ± | 8.76 | 2.28 | ± | 5.59 | 0.044 |
Fig 1Simple linear regression between changes in vertebral CSA and vertebral wedging (r = -0.611; p = 0.001).
Multiple linear regression model relating gains in age, height, weight, and vertebral CSA to changes in vertebral wedging.
| β | 95% CI | R2 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Δ | 0.442 | |||
| Δ Age (yr) | 3.405 | -10.107, 16.916 | 0.607 | |
| Δ Height (cm) | -0.235 | -0.752, 0.282 | 0.356 | |
| Δ Weight (kg) | -0.174 | -0.481, 0.133 | 0.252 | |
| Δ Vertebral CSA (cm2) | -5.783 | -10.320, -1.245 | 0.015 |
Changes in age, anthropometric measures, and lumbar spine morphology of girls with increased and deceased vertebral wedging.
| Increased Wedging | Decreased Wedging | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (n = 14) | (n = 13) | ||||||
| Δ Age (yr) | 1.2 | ± | 0.07 | 1.3 | ± | 0.10 | 0.091 |
| Δ Height (cm) | 5.6 | ± | 2.10 | 7.3 | ± | 2.26 | 0.049 |
| Δ Weight (kg) | 7.1 | ± | 3.78 | 7.2 | ± | 3.17 | 0.895 |
| Δ Lumbar Vertebral CSA (cm2) | 0.39 | ± | 0.25 | 0.75 | ± | 0.23 | 0.001 |
| Δ Vertebral Wedging (°) | 2.4 | ± | 2.09 | -2.3 | ± | 1.41 | <0.0001 |
| Δ Lumbar Lordosis (°) | 4.0 | ± | 6.90 | 0.5 | ± | 3.02 | 0.103 |
Fig 2Boxplot showing differences in vertebral cross-sectional growth between girls with increased (n = 14) and decreased vertebral body wedging (n = 13); p = 0.001.
Multiple linear regressions of baseline and follow-up lordosis as a function of age, height, weight, and vertebral wedging.
| Baseline | ||||
| 0.664 | ||||
| Age (yr) | 2.916 | 0.117, 5.715 | 0.042 | |
| Height (cm) | -0.237 | -0.730, 0.255 | 0.328 | |
| Weight (kg) | 0.394 | 0.029, 0.758 | 0.036 | |
| Vertebral Wedging (°) | 1.802 | 1.023, 2.582 | <0.0001 | |
| Follow-Up | ||||
| 0.480 | ||||
| Age (yr) | 2.301 | -0.759, 5.361 | 0.133 | |
| Height (cm) | -0.285 | -0.870, 0.299 | 0.322 | |
| Weight (kg) | 0.212 | -0.164, 0.589 | 0.255 | |
| Vertebral Wedging (°) | 1.857 | 0.726, 2.988 | 0.003 |
Multiple linear regression model on the effect of changes in vertebral wedging, after adjusting for gains in age, height, and weight, on lumbar lordosis progression.
| β | 95% CI | R2 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| | 0.361 | |||
| Δ Age (yr) | 0.606 | -23.595, 24.807 | 0.959 | |
| Δ Height (cm) | 0.593 | -0.415, 1.601 | 0.235 | |
| Δ Weight (kg) | -0.034 | -0.624, 0.555 | 0.906 | |
| Δ Vertebral Wedging (°) | 1.283 | 0.506, 2.060 | 0.002 |