Literature DB >> 35712933

[Impact of sarcopenia on effectiveness of lumbar decompression surgery in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis].

Ziquan Li1, Cong Zhang2, Hai Wang1, Keyi Yu1, Jianguo Zhang1, Yipeng Wang1.   

Abstract

Objective: To investigate the impact of sarcopenia on effectiveness of lumbar decompression surgery in patients with lumbar spinal stenosis.
Methods: The clinical data of 50 patients with lumbar spinal stenosis who met the selection criteria between August 2017 and December 2020 were retrospectively analyzed. According to the diagnostic criteria of the European Working Group on Sarcopenia in Older People (EWGSOP), based on the calculation of the skeletal muscle index (SMI) at the L 3 level, SMI<45.4 cm 2/m 2 (men) and SMI<34.4 cm 2/m 2 (women) were used as the diagnostic threshold, the patients were divided into sarcopenia group (25 cases) and non-sarcopenia group (25 cases). There was no significant difference in gender, age, disease duration, level of lumbar spinal stenosis, surgical fusion level, and comorbidity between the two groups ( P>0.05); the body mass index in sarcopenia group was significantly lower than that in non-sarcopenia group ( t=-3.198, P=0.002). Clinical data of the two groups were recorded and compared, including operation time, intraoperative blood loss, postoperative drainage volume, hospitalization stay, and complications. The visual analogue scale (VAS) scores of low back pain and sciatica and Oswestry disability index (ODI) scores were recorded preoperatively and at last follow-up. The effectiveness was evaluated according to modified MacNab standard.
Results: There was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of operation time, intraoperative blood loss, and postoperative drainage volume ( P>0.05). However, the hospitalization stay in sarcopenia group was significantly longer than that in non-sarcopenia group ( t=2.105, P=0.044). The patients were followed up 7-36 months (mean, 29.7 months). In sarcopenia group, 1 case of dural tear and cerebrospinal fluid leakage occurred during operation, as well as 1 case of internal fixator loosening during follow-up; 1 case of incision exudation and poor healing occurred in each of the two groups, and no adjacent segment degeneration and deep vein thrombosis of lower extremity occurred in the two groups during follow-up. There was no significant difference in the incidence of complications (12% vs. 4%) between the two groups ( χ 2=1.333, P=0.513). VAS scores in low back pain and sciatica as well as ODI scores in two groups significantly improved when compared with preoperative results at last follow-up ( P<0.05). The differences of VAS scores in low back pain and ODI scores before and after operation in sarcopenia group were significantly lower than that in non-sarcopenia group ( P<0.05). However, there was no significant difference of that in VAS scores of sciatica between the two groups ( t=-1.494, P=0.144). According to the modified MacNab standard, the excellent and good rate of the sarcopenia group was 92%, and that of the non-sarcopenia group was 96%, showing no significant difference between the two groups ( χ 2 =1.201, P=0.753).
Conclusion: Patients with sarcopenia and lumbar spinal stenosis may have longer postoperative recovery time, and the effectiveness is worse than that of non-sarcopenic patients. Therefore, for elderly patients with lumbar spine disease, it is suggested to improve preoperative assessment of sarcopenia, which can help to identify patients with sarcopenia at risk of poor surgical prognosis in advance, so as to provide rehabilitation guidance and nutritional intervention in the perioperative period.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Sarcopenia; effectiveness; lumbar spinal stenosis; posterior lumbar surgery

Mesh:

Year:  2022        PMID: 35712933      PMCID: PMC9240839          DOI: 10.7507/1002-1892.202202048

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Zhongguo Xiu Fu Chong Jian Wai Ke Za Zhi        ISSN: 1002-1892


  23 in total

Review 1.  Frailty, Sarcopenia, and Malnutrition Frequently (Co-)occur in Hospitalized Older Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Authors:  Gerdien C Ligthart-Melis; Yvette C Luiking; Alexia Kakourou; Tommy Cederholm; Andrea B Maier; Marian A E de van der Schueren
Journal:  J Am Med Dir Assoc       Date:  2020-04-21       Impact factor: 4.669

Review 2.  Imaging of sarcopenia: old evidence and new insights.

Authors:  Domenico Albano; Carmelo Messina; Jacopo Vitale; Luca Maria Sconfienza
Journal:  Eur Radiol       Date:  2019-12-13       Impact factor: 5.315

Review 3.  Sarcopenia - Molecular mechanisms and open questions.

Authors:  Petra Wiedmer; Tobias Jung; José Pedro Castro; Laura C D Pomatto; Patrick Y Sun; Kelvin J A Davies; Tilman Grune
Journal:  Ageing Res Rev       Date:  2020-10-29       Impact factor: 10.895

4.  Sarcopenia in Asia: consensus report of the Asian Working Group for Sarcopenia.

Authors:  Liang-Kung Chen; Li-Kuo Liu; Jean Woo; Prasert Assantachai; Tung-Wai Auyeung; Kamaruzzaman Shahrul Bahyah; Ming-Yueh Chou; Liang-Yu Chen; Pi-Shan Hsu; Orapitchaya Krairit; Jenny S W Lee; Wei-Ju Lee; Yunhwan Lee; Chih-Kuang Liang; Panita Limpawattana; Chu-Sheng Lin; Li-Ning Peng; Shosuke Satake; Takao Suzuki; Chang Won Won; Chih-Hsing Wu; Si-Nan Wu; Teimei Zhang; Ping Zeng; Masahiro Akishita; Hidenori Arai
Journal:  J Am Med Dir Assoc       Date:  2014-02       Impact factor: 4.669

5.  Sarcopenia: revised European consensus on definition and diagnosis.

Authors:  Alfonso J Cruz-Jentoft; Gülistan Bahat; Jürgen Bauer; Yves Boirie; Olivier Bruyère; Tommy Cederholm; Cyrus Cooper; Francesco Landi; Yves Rolland; Avan Aihie Sayer; Stéphane M Schneider; Cornel C Sieber; Eva Topinkova; Maurits Vandewoude; Marjolein Visser; Mauro Zamboni
Journal:  Age Ageing       Date:  2019-01-01       Impact factor: 10.668

Review 6.  Sarcopenia: etiology, clinical consequences, intervention, and assessment.

Authors:  T Lang; T Streeper; P Cawthon; K Baldwin; D R Taaffe; T B Harris
Journal:  Osteoporos Int       Date:  2009-09-25       Impact factor: 4.507

7.  The role of sarcopenia in the pancreatic adenocarcinoma.

Authors:  B Pessia; A Giuliani; L Romano; F Bruno; F Carlei; V Vicentini; M Schietroma
Journal:  Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci       Date:  2021-05       Impact factor: 3.507

Review 8.  Preserving Mobility in Older Adults with Physical Frailty and Sarcopenia: Opportunities, Challenges, and Recommendations for Physical Activity Interventions.

Authors:  Maxime Billot; Riccardo Calvani; Annele Urtamo; Juan Luis Sánchez-Sánchez; Cecilia Ciccolari-Micaldi; Milan Chang; Regina Roller-Wirnsberger; Gerhard Wirnsberger; Alan Sinclair; Nieves Vaquero-Pinto; Satu Jyväkorpi; Hanna Öhman; Timo Strandberg; Jos M G A Schols; Annemie M W J Schols; Nick Smeets; Eva Topinkova; Helena Michalkova; Anna Rita Bonfigli; Fabrizia Lattanzio; Leocadio Rodríguez-Mañas; Hélio Coelho-Júnior; Marianna Broccatelli; Maria Elena D'Elia; Damiano Biscotti; Emanuele Marzetti; Ellen Freiberger
Journal:  Clin Interv Aging       Date:  2020-09-16       Impact factor: 4.458

9.  Chair-Stand Exercise Improves Sarcopenia in Rehabilitation Patients after Stroke.

Authors:  Yoshihiro Yoshimura; Hidetaka Wakabayashi; Fumihiko Nagano; Takahiro Bise; Sayuri Shimazu; Ai Shiraishi; Yoshifumi Kido; Ayaka Matsumoto
Journal:  Nutrients       Date:  2022-01-20       Impact factor: 5.717

10.  Investigation of the Effect of Nutritional Supplementation with Whey Protein and Vitamin D on Muscle Mass and Muscle Quality in Subacute Post-Stroke Rehabilitation Patients: A Randomized, Single-Blinded, Placebo-Controlled Trial.

Authors:  Kaoru Honaga; Naoki Mori; Tomonori Akimoto; Masahiro Tsujikawa; Michiyuki Kawakami; Tomoyuki Okamoto; Yasuyuki Sakata; Hirokazu Hamano; Yasuhiro Takeda; Kunitsugu Kondo
Journal:  Nutrients       Date:  2022-02-06       Impact factor: 5.717

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.