| Literature DB >> 34930199 |
Geng-Xiong Lin1, Yan-Ming Ma1, Yong-Chun Xiao1, Dian Xiang1,2, Jian-Xian Luo1, Guo-Wei Zhang3, Zhi-Sheng Ji4, Hong-Sheng Lin5.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to analyze the effect of unilateral K-rod dynamic internal fixation on paraspinal muscles for lumbar degenerative diseases.Entities:
Keywords: Dynamic internal fixation; Fatty infiltration; K-rod; Lumbar degenerative disease; PLIF; Paraspinal muscles atrophy
Mesh:
Year: 2021 PMID: 34930199 PMCID: PMC8690627 DOI: 10.1186/s12891-021-04943-w
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Musculoskelet Disord ISSN: 1471-2474 Impact factor: 2.362
Fig. 1A. MRI T2 Axis map: The preoperative area of paraspinal muscles and fat of LAS in the PLIF group. B. MRI T2 Axis map: The postoperative area of paraspinal muscles and fat of LAS in the PLIF group. C. MRI T2 Axis map: The preoperative area of paraspinal muscles and fat of LAS in the K-rod dynamic internal fixation group. D. MRI T2 Axis map: The postoperative area of paraspinal muscles and fat of LAS in the K-rod dynamic internal fixation group. A’-D′: The periphery of the paraspinal muscles on the image was outlined using yellow line
Comparisons of basic characteristics of patients between K-rod group and PLIF
| K-rod group | PLIF group | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Gender (male/female) | 21/6 | 13/12 | 0.051 |
| Follow-up (month,−x ± s | 16 ± 6 | 17 ± 5 | 0.000*** |
| Operation time (min,−x ± s | 144.7 ± 41.0 | 222.9 ± 86.1 | 0.000*** |
| Blood loss (ml,−x ± s) | 81.1 ± 48.5 | 294.0 ± 156.3 | 0.000*** |
| Drainage (ml,−x ± s) | 88.3 ± 44.1 | 212.9 ± 177.6 | 0.002** |
| Exercise time turning to the ground(d,−x ± s) | 2.2 ± 0.5 | 5.2 ± 1.0 | 0.000** |
| Hospital stay time(d,−x ± s) | 10.5 ± 2.7 | 15.0 ± 10.1 | 0.015* |
PLIF Posterior lumbar interbody fusion. *means P < 0.05.**means P < 0.01.***means P < 0.001
Comparisons of VAS score and ODI of patients between K-rod group and PLIF (−x ± s)
| VAS | ODI | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Preoperative | postoperative | Preoperative | postoperative | |||
| K-rod group | 5.95 ± 1.18 | 1.05 ± 0.62 | 59.87 ± 4.68 | 9.37 ± 4.40 | ||
| PLIF group | 6.53 ± 0.91 | 2.53 ± 0.61 | 60.26 ± 7.45 | 18.42 ± 3.75 | ||
| Group×Rep | 0.001** | < 0.001*** | ||||
| Group | < 0.001*** | 0.003** | ||||
| Rep | < 0.001*** | < 0.001*** | ||||
PLIF Posterior lumbar interbody fusion. VAS Visual analog scale. ODI Oswestry dysfunction index, **means P < 0.01.***means P < 0.001
Comparisons of paraspinal muscle FCSA of patients between K-rod group and PLIF (−x ± s)
| Upper segment FCSA (cm2) | Lower segment FCSA | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Preoperative | postoperative | Preoperative | postoperative | |||
| K-rod group | 10.74 ± 2.94 | 10.49 ± 2.93 | 15.13 ± 3.69 | 14.91 ± 3.47 | ||
| PLIF group | 7.83 ± 2.55 | 6.97 ± 2.80 | 11.82 ± 2.69 | 9.82 ± 2.78 | ||
| Group×Rep | < 0.001*** | < 0.001*** | ||||
| Group | < 0.001*** | < 0.001*** | ||||
| Rep | < 0.001*** | < 0.001*** | ||||
PLIF Posterior lumbar interbody fusion. FCSA Functional cross-sectional area. ***means P < 0.001
Comparison of UAS and LAS in the K-rod group between the surgical side and contralateral paraspinal muscle FCSA (−x ± s, cm2)
| UAS (cm2) | LAS | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Preoperative | postoperative | Preoperative | postoperative | |||
| Surgical side | 5.31 ± 1.46 | 4.98 ± 1.62 | 7.47 ± 2.04 | 7.11 ± 1.81 | ||
| Contralateral side | 5.42 ± 1.51 | 5.64 ± 1.60 | 7.66 ± 1.72 | 7.81 ± 1.78 | ||
| Group×Rep | 0.001** | 0.015* | ||||
| Group | 0.446 | 0.452 | ||||
| Rep | 0.488 | 0.278 | ||||
PLIF Posterior lumbar interbody fusion. FCSA Functional cross-sectional area. *means P < 0.05. **means P < 0.01
Comparison the area of paraspinal muscle fatty infiltration between K-rod group and PLIF in UAS and LAS (−x ± s, cm2)
| Area of fatty infiltration on UAS | Area of fatty infiltration on LAS | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Preoperative | postoperative | Preoperative | postoperative | |||
| K-rod group | 1.91 ± 1.26 | 2.69 ± 1.46 | 3.17 ± 1.58 | 4.74 ± 2.27 | ||
| PLIF group | 3.20 ± 1.92 | 4.13 ± 2.24 | 5.64 ± 1.84 | 8.12 ± 4.02 | ||
| Group×Rep | 0.762 | 0.429 | ||||
| Group | 0.013* | < 0.001*** | ||||
| Rep | 0.001** | 0.001** | ||||
PLIF Posterior lumbar interbody fusion. UAS Upper adjacent segment. LAS Lower adjacent segment
*means P < 0.05. **means P < 0.01.***means P < 0.001.Rep:Repetition
Comparison the changes in degree of paraspinal muscle fatty infiltration between K-rod group and PLIF in UAS and LAS
| K-rod group | PLIF group | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 2 | ||
| UAS | 16 | 3 | 0 | 10 | 5 | 3 | 0.104 |
| LAS | 12 | 6 | 1 | 2 | 11 | 5 | 0.002** |
PLIF Posterior lumbar interbody fusion. UAS Upper adjacent segment. LAS Lower adjacent segment. **means P < 0.01
Correlational analysis of postoperative lower back pain and paraspinal muscle atrophy and fatty infiltration
| Model | Unstandardized Coefficients | Standardized Coefficients | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| B | Beta | Beta | |||
| (Constant) | 2.244 | 0.438 | 5.127 | < 0.001*** | |
| Area paraspinal muscle of UAS(X1) | −0.128 | 0.035 | −0.483 | −3.674 | 0.001** |
| Area of fatty infiltration of LAS(X2) | 0.097 | 0.035 | 0.360 | 2.738 | 0.010* |
UAS Upper adjacent segment. LAS Lower adjacent segment. *means P < 0.05.**means P < 0.01.***means P < 0.001
a Dependent Variable: VAS score