» Articles » PMID: 27421282

Magnetic Resonance Imaging of Lumbar Trunk Parameters in Chronic Low Backache Patients and Healthy Population: a Comparative Study

Overview
Journal Eur Spine J
Specialty Orthopedics
Date 2016 Jul 17
PMID 27421282
Citations 9
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Purpose: The aim of this study was to evaluate the lumbar trunk parameters by MRI and investigate their association with chronic low backache.

Methods: Fifty patients (26 males and 24 females) with mean age 33.54 ± 8.33 years with a history of low back pain (LBP) of minimum 3 consecutive months constituted the study group (Group A). To match with the study group, 15 normal healthy volunteers (9 males and 6 females) with no history of back pain were selected (Group B). Both the groups were subjected to magnetic resonance imaging of lumbosacral spine and lumbar trunk parameters were calculated.

Results: Trunk width, depth and skin angle were comparable at L3-L4, L4-L5 and L5-S1 disc levels; significant difference with regard to disc angle of L3-L4 (p = 0.005) and L4-L5 (p = 0.02) and cross-sectional area (CSA) of disc at L4-L5 level (p = 0.01) was observed between two groups. There was a tendency of smaller CSA of paraspinal and abdominal oblique muscles in Group A patients, but the measurements were not statistically different from Group B patients. Rectus abdominis muscles showed a unique pattern of larger CSA at L3-L4 and L4-L5 disc levels and smaller CSA at L5-S1 in LBP patients. Intervertebral disc degenerative changes on MRI were observed in 27 (54 %) patients in the Group A; and none of the Group B participants showed degenerative changes.

Conclusions: Tendency of smaller trunk musculature CSA may be a cause or a result of chronic LBP. A unique pattern of larger CSA at L3-L4 and L4-L5 disc levels and smaller CSA at L5-S1 of Rectus abdominis muscles is observed in LBP patients compared to healthy persons. Differences in disc angles and CSA of disc at L3-L4 and L4-L5 levels between the two groups signify that these may be the predisposing factors leading to LBP due to abnormal load/stress transmission and precipitating early degenerative changes in the disc.

Citing Articles

The association between morphological characteristics of paraspinal muscle and spinal disorders.

Suo M, Zhang J, Sun T, Wang J, Liu X, Huang H Ann Med. 2023; 55(2):2258922.

PMID: 37722876 PMC: 10512810. DOI: 10.1080/07853890.2023.2258922.


Comparison of yoga and dynamic neuromuscular stabilization exercise in chronic low back pain on magnetic resonance imaging of lumbar multifidus- protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

Venkatesan P, K S, Kishen T, Janardhan S, Kumar Cr S Contemp Clin Trials Commun. 2022; 28:100937.

PMID: 35789639 PMC: 9249668. DOI: 10.1016/j.conctc.2022.100937.


Radiological Assessment of Postoperative Paraspinal Muscle Changes After Lumbar Interbody Fusion With or Without Minimally Invasive Techniques.

Kameyama K, Ohba T, Endo T, Katsu M, Koji F, Kensuke K Global Spine J. 2021; 13(2):295-303.

PMID: 33657897 PMC: 9972276. DOI: 10.1177/2192568221994794.


Assessing lumbar paraspinal muscle cross-sectional area and fat composition with T1 versus T2-weighted magnetic resonance imaging: Reliability and concurrent validity.

Cooley J, Hebert J, de Zoete A, Jensen T, Algra P, Kjaer P PLoS One. 2021; 16(2):e0244633.

PMID: 33544707 PMC: 7864460. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0244633.


Which is the most affected muscle in lumbar back pain - multifidus or erector spinae?.

Ozturk P, Aylanc N Pol J Radiol. 2020; 85:e278-e286.

PMID: 32685062 PMC: 7361368. DOI: 10.5114/pjr.2020.96391.


References
1.
Niemelainen R, Briand M, Battie M . Substantial asymmetry in paraspinal muscle cross-sectional area in healthy adults questions its value as a marker of low back pain and pathology. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2011; 36(25):2152-7. DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0b013e318204b05a. View

2.
Mengiardi B, Schmid M, Boos N, Pfirrmann C, Brunner F, Elfering A . Fat content of lumbar paraspinal muscles in patients with chronic low back pain and in asymptomatic volunteers: quantification with MR spectroscopy. Radiology. 2006; 240(3):786-92. DOI: 10.1148/radiol.2403050820. View

3.
Kader D, Wardlaw D, Smith F . Correlation between the MRI changes in the lumbar multifidus muscles and leg pain. Clin Radiol. 2000; 55(2):145-9. DOI: 10.1053/crad.1999.0340. View

4.
Lee H, Song J, Lee H, Kang J, Kim M, Ryu J . Association between Cross-sectional Areas of Lumbar Muscles on Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Chronicity of Low Back Pain. Ann Rehabil Med. 2012; 35(6):852-9. PMC: 3309393. DOI: 10.5535/arm.2011.35.6.852. View

5.
Danneels L, Vanderstraeten G, Cambier D, Witvrouw E, de Cuyper H . CT imaging of trunk muscles in chronic low back pain patients and healthy control subjects. Eur Spine J. 2001; 9(4):266-72. PMC: 3611341. DOI: 10.1007/s005860000190. View