Author:
Wen Gang,Hou Wanmei,Xu Guangwei
Abstract
Abstract
Background
The simplified 3-grade system for measuring fat infiltration in the paraspinal muscles is widely utilized. In comparing our proposed 4-grade system to the existing 3-grade system, we evaluated its impact on results and particularly its ability to predict disc herniation, ultimately highlighting deficiencies in the latter. The objective of this investigation was to validate the efficacy of our newly proposed semi-quantitative simplified 4-grade system for assessing fat infiltration, as compared to the existing literature-based simplified 3-grade system, in terms of their predictive value for lumbar disc herniation.
Methods
Infiltration of the right and left lumbar multifidus and erector spinae muscles were assessed using a semi-quantitative 3- and 4-grade fat infiltration system on axial magnetic resonance imaging sections at the L3-S1 level in all subjects, with comparison of results between groups. The correlation between these grading systems and lumbar disc herniation was investigated.
Results
The simplified 3-degree system for measuring fat infiltration was not effective in predicting lumbar disc herniation (p > 0.05), while the 4-degree system proved to be useful in predicting it (p < 0.05). In both grading systems, females were found to have a higher risk of lumbar disc herniation than males (p < 0.05), and the risk increased with age and body mass index (BMI) (p < 0.001).
Conclusions
It was observed that using the 4-grade fat infiltration system to determine the level of fat infiltration in the paraspinal muscles is more effective in predicting lumbar disc herniation compared to the 3-grade system. The 4-grade fat infiltration grading system proves to be an efficient semi-quantitative method that can replace the simplified 3-grade system.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Orthopedics and Sports Medicine,Surgery
Reference40 articles.
1. Hoy D, March L, Brooks P, Blyth F, Wolf A, Bain C, et al. The global burden of low back pain: estimates from the Global Burden of Disease 2010 study. Ann Rheum Dis. 2014;73(6):968–74. https://doi.org/10.1136/annrheumdis-2013-204428.
2. Kong WZ, Goel VK, Gilbertson LG, Weinstein JN. Effects of muscle dysfunction on lumbar spine mechanics: a finite element study based on a two motion segments model. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 1996;21(19):2197–206. https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-199610010-00004.
3. Kreiner S, Hwang S, Easa J, Resnick DK, Baisden J, Bess S, et al. Clinical guidelines for multidisciplinary spine care diagnosis and treatment of lumbar disc herniation with radiculopathy. Burr Ridge: North American Spine Society; 2012.
4. Kalichman L, Carmeli E, Been E. The association between imaging parameters of the paraspinal muscles, spinal degeneration, and low back pain. Biomed Res Int. 2017;2017:2562957. https://doi.org/10.1155/2017/2562957.
5. Zhao X, Liang H, Hua Z, Li W, Li J, Wang L, Shen Y. The morphological characteristics of paraspinal muscles in young patients with unilateral neurological symptoms of lumbar disc herniation. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2022;23(1):994. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12891-022-05968-5.