Alteration of lumbar muscle morphology and composition in relation to low back pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND CONTEXTPrevious studies have proposed that there is a relationship between low back pain (LBP) and morphology and composition of paraspinal muscles. However, results have been conflicting, especially regarding fatty infiltration of muscles.PURPOSEThe primary goal of this study was to review and analyze results from imaging studies which investigated morphological and composition changes in the multifidus, erector spinae and psoas major muscles in people with LBP.STUDY DESIGN/SETTINGSystematic review with meta-analysis.PATIENT SAMPLEA patient sample was not requiredOUTCOME MEASURESThis review did not have outcome measures.METHODSPubMed, Scopus, Web of Sciences, EMBASE and ProQuest were searched for eligible studies up to 31st July 2020 (all languages). A systematic search of electronic databases was conducted to identify studies investigating the association between the morphology and fat content of lumbar muscles in people with LBP compared with a (no LBP) control group. 13,795 articles were identified. Based on the screening for inclusion/ exclusion, 25 were included. The quality of the studies was evaluated using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. From the 25 articles, 20 were included in the meta-analysis.RESULTSResults showed that the total cross-sectional area of the multifidus was smaller in people with LBP (Standardized mean difference, SMD = -0.24, 95% CI = -0.5 to 0.03). Combined SMDs showed a medium effect of LBP on increasing multifidus muscle fat infiltration (SMD = 0.61, 95% CI = 0.30 to 0.91). There were no LBP related differences identified in the morphology or composition of the lumbar erector spine and psoas major muscles.CONCLUSIONSPeople with LBP were found to have somewhat smaller multifidus muscles with a significant amount of intramuscular fat infiltration. Varying sample size, age and BMI of participants, quality of studies and the procedures used to measure fat infiltration are possible reasons for inconsistencies in results of previous studies.     

Biomechanical analysis of two insertion sites for the fixation of the sacroiliac joint via an oblique lateral approach

BackgroundThe sacroiliac joint is an important source of low back pain. In severe cases, sacroiliac joint fusion is used to reduce pain, but revision rates can reach 30%. The lack of initial mechanical stability may lead to pseudarthrosis, thus not alleviating the patient's symptoms. This could be due to the damage induced to the interosseous ligament during implant insertion. Decoupling instrumentation steps (drilling-tapping and implant insertion) would allow verifying this hypothesis. Moreover, no biomechanical studies have been published on sacroiliac joint fixation with an oblique lateral approach, while it has important clinical advantages over the direct lateral approach.MethodsEight cadaveric human pelves with both ischia embedded were tested in three sequential states: intact, drilled-tapped and instrumented with one cylindrical threaded implant with an oblique lateral trajectory. Specimens were assigned one of two insertion sites (distal point; near the posterior superior iliac spine, and proximal point; anterosuperior to the distal point) and tested in compression and flexion-extension. Vertical and angular displacements of the sacroiliac joint were measured locally using digital image correlation methods.FindingsIn compression, instrumentation significantly reduced vertical displacements (17% (SD 22%), P = 0.04) but no difference was found for angular displacements or flexion-extension loads (P > 0.05). Drilling-tapping did not change the stability of the sacroiliac joint (P > 0.05); there was no statistical difference between the insertion sites (P > 0.05).InterpretationsInsertion of one implant through either the distal or proximal insertion site with an oblique lateral approach significantly reduced vertical displacements of the sacroiliac joint in compression, a predominant load of this joint.Research ethics committeePolytechnique Montreal: CÉR-1617-30.     

The effects of hallux valgus and walking speed on dynamic balance in older adults

BackgroundHallux valgus (HV) contributes to deficits in static balance and increased fall risk in older adults. Very limited research has examined dynamic balance deficits in walking in this population. These individuals generally walk slowly, as balance challenge is lesser at slow speeds.Research questionHow does the dynamic balance of older adults with HV differ from healthy controls at controlled slow and fast walking speeds?MethodsNineteen older adults with HV and 13 healthy controls completed 5 continuous walking trials at 1.0 and 1.3 m·s⁻¹ as whole body marker position and ground reaction force data were captured. Dynamic balance was evaluated using whole body center of mass (COM) and center of pressure (COP) inclination angles (IA) and duration of double support.ResultsThere were no differences in measures of dynamic balance between older adults with and without HV at slow and fast speeds. At the faster speed, the peak sagittal plane COM-COP IA increased and the double support duration decreased, while the peak frontal plane COM-COP IA were not affected.SignificanceOlder adults with HV do not exhibit deficits in dynamic balance during continuous walking at comfortable speeds when compared to healthy older adults.     

Why X-rays? The importance of radiographs in spine surgery

Despite the advances made in high-resolution spinal imaging, plain films (radiographs or x-rays) remain a cornerstone of evaluating and caring for spine patients in the preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative settings. Although often undervalued when compared with more advanced imaging such as MRIs or CT scans, plain films provide surgeons invaluable information that other imaging modalities oftentimes cannot. In addition to their use during surgery for localization or evaluation of hardware placement, x-rays provide an overall image of a patient's spine, are useful in evaluating hardware complications, allow detailed assessment of alignment and stability and allow for repeated images in clinic during follow-up. Plain films continue to provide critical information that cannot be obtained with other imaging modalities, and they remain central to providing optimal care for spine patients.     

D-dimer for diagnosis of periprosthetic joint infection: A meta-analysis

BackgroundThe D-dimer test is easily available to detect periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). This study aimed to estimate the diagnostic accuracy of the D-dimer test in PJI diagnosis and identify possible independent factors affecting the diagnostic value of this test.MethodsMEDLINE and EMBASE databases identified literature until February 2020 that utilized the D-dimer test for PJI diagnosis. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, area under the curve (AUC), diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), positive likelihood ratio (PLR), and negative likelihood ratio (NLR) were calculated to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of the D-dimer test. Meta-regression and subgroup analyses were performed to assess potential heterogeneity.ResultsThe databases identified 243 records, and eight studies were included in the final analysis. The pooled sensitivity and specificity of the D-dimer test for PJI diagnosis were 0.78 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.69–0.84) and 0.74 (95% CI, 0.85–0.99), respectively. The AUCs and DORs of the D-dimer test were 0.83 (95% CI, 0.79–0.86) and 10 (95% CI, 4–24), respectively. The PLR and NLR of the D-dimer test for PJI detection were 3.0 (95% CI, 1.9–4.8) and 0.30 (95% CI, 0.20–0.47), respectively. The results of the meta-regression and subgroup analyses indicated that studies that excluded patients with hypercoagulation disorder had higher sensitivity (0.85 vs 0.86) and specificity (0.83 vs 0.62). The sensitivity of the D-dimer test also improved in studies that excluded patients with inflammatory arthritis (0.81 vs 0.75).ConclusionThe D-dimer test is a practical method for PJI diagnosis, especially in patients without history of hypercoagulation disorder and inflammatory arthritis.     

Misaligned spinal rods can induce high internal forces consistent with those observed to cause screw pullout and disc degeneration

BACKGROUND CONTEXTManual contouring of spinal rods is often required intraoperatively for proper alignment of the rods within the pedicle screw heads. Residual misalignments are frequently reduced by using dedicated reduction devices. The forces exerted by these devices, however, are uncontrolled and may lead to excessive reaction forces. As a consequence, screw pullout might be provoked and surrounding tissue may experience unfavorable biomechanical loads. The corresponding loads and induced tissue deformations are however not well identified. Additionally, whether the forced reduction alters the biomechanical behavior of the lumbar spine during physiological movements postoperatively, remains unexplored.PURPOSETo predict whether the reduction of misaligned posterior instrumentation might result in clinical complications directly after reduction and during a subsequent physiological flexion movement.STUDY DESIGNFinite element analysis.METHODSA patient-specific, total lumbar (L1–S1) spine finite element model was available from previous research. The model consists of poro-elastic intervertebral discs with Pfirrmann grade-dependent material parameters, with linear elastic bone tissue with stiffness values related to the local bone density, and with the seven major ligaments per spinal motion segment described as nonlinear materials. Titanium instrumentation was implemented in this model to simulate a L4, L5, and S1 posterolateral fusion. Next, coronal and sagittal misalignments of 6 mm each were introduced between the rod and the screw head at L4. These misalignments were computationally reduced and a physiological flexion movement of 15° was prescribed. Non-instrumented and well-aligned instrumented models were used as control groups.RESULTSPulling forces up to 1.0 kN were required to correct the induced misalignments of 6 mm. These forces affected the posture of the total lumbar spine, as motion segments were predicted to rotate up to 3 degrees and rotations propagated proximally to and even affect the L1–2 level. The facet contact pressures in the corrected misaligned models were asymmetrical suggesting non-physiological joint loading in the misaligned models. In addition, the discs and vertebrae experienced abnormally high forces as a result of the correction procedure. These effects were more pronounced after a 15° flexion movement following forced reduction.CONCLUSIONSThe results of this study indicate that the correction of misaligned posterior instrumentation can result in high forces at the screws consistent with those reported to cause screw pullout, and may cause high-tissue strains in adjacent and downstream spinal segments.CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCEProper alignment of spinal posterior instrumentation may reduce clinical complications secondary to unfavorable biomechanics.     

Analysis of the influence of species,intervertebral disc height and Pfirrmann classification on failure load of an injured disc using a novel disc herniation model

Background ContextAnnular repair devices offer a solution to recurrent disc herniations by closing an annular defect and lowering the risk of reherniation. Given the significant risk of neurologic injury from device failure it is imperative that a reliable preclinical model exists to demonstrate a high load to failure for the disc repair devices.PurposeTo establish a preclinical model for disc herniation and demonstrate how changes in species, intervertebral disc height and Pfirrmann classification impacts failure load on an injured disc. We hypothesized that: (1) The force required for disc herniation would be variable across disc morphologies and species, and (2) for human discs the force to herniation would inversely correlate with the degree of disc degeneration.Study designAnimal and human cadaveric biomechanical model of disc herniation.MethodsWe tested calf lumbar spines, bovine tail segments and human lumbar spines. We first divided individual lumbar or tail segments to include the vertebral bodies and disc. We then hydrated the specimens by placing them in a saline bath overnight. A magnetic resonance images were acquired from human specimens and a Pfirrmann classification was made. A stab incision measuring 25% of the diameter of the disc was then done to each specimen along the posterior intervertebral disc space. Each specimen was placed in custom test fixtures on a servo-hydraulic test frame (MTS, Eden Prarie, MN) such that the superior body was attached to a 10,000 lb load cell and the inferior body was supported on the piston. A compressive ramping load was placed on the specimen in load control at 4 MPa/sec stopping at 75% of the disc height. Load was recorded throughout the test and failure load calculated. Once the test was completed each specimen was sliced through the center of the disc and photos were taken of the cut surface.ResultsFifteen each of calf, human, and bovine tail segments were tested. The failure load varied significantly between specimens (p<.001) with human specimens having the highest average failure load (8154±2049 N). Disc height was higher for lumbar/bovine tail segments as compared to calf specimens (p<.001) with bovine tails having the highest disc height (7.1±1.7 mm). Similarly, human lumbar discs had a cross sectional area that was greater than both bovine tail/calf lumbar spines (p<.001). There was no correlation between disc height and failure load within each individual species (p>.05). Cross sectional area and failure load did not correlate with failure load for human lumbar spine and bovine tails (p>.05) but did correlate with calf spine (r=0.53, p=.04). There was a statistically significant inverse correlation between disc height and Pfirrmann classification for human lumbar spines (r=?0.84, p<.001). There was also a statistically significant inverse relationship between Pfirrmann classification and failure load (r=?0.58, p=.02).ConclusionsWe have established a model for disc herniation and have shown how results of this model vary between species, disc morphology, and Pfirrmann classification. Both hypotheses were accepted: The force required for disc herniation was variable across species, and the force to herniation for human spines was inversely correlated with the degree of disc degeneration. We recommend that models using human intervertebral discs should include data on Pfirrmann classification, while biomechanical models using calf spines should report cross sectional area. Failure loads do not vary based on dimensions for bovine tails.Clinical SignificanceOur analysis of models for disc herniation will allow for quicker, reliable comparisons of failure forces required to induce a disc herniation. Future work with these models may facilitate rapid testing of devices to repair a torn/ruptured annulus.     

Lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis: factors associated with the decision to fuse

BACKGROUND CONTEXTThe indication to perform a fusion and decompression surgery as opposed to decompression alone for lumbar degenerative spondylolisthesis (LDS) remains controversial. A variety of factors are considered when deciding on whether to fuse, including patient demographics, radiographic parameters, and symptom presentation. Likely surgeon preference has an important influence as well.PURPOSEThe aim of this study was to assess factors associated with the decision of a Canadian academic spine surgeon to perform a fusion for LDS.STUDY DESIGN/SETTINGThis study is a retrospective analysis of patients prospectively enrolled in a multicenter Canadian study that was designed to evaluate the assessment and surgical management of LDS.PATIENT SAMPLEInclusion criteria were patients with: radiographic evidence of LDS and neurogenic claudication or radicular pain, undergoing posterior decompression alone or posterior decompression and fusion, performed in one of seven, participating academic centers from 2015 to 2019.OUTCOME MEASURESPatient demographics, patient-rated outcome measures (Oswestry Disability Index [ODI], numberical rating scale back pain and leg pain, SF-12), and imaging parameters were recorded in the Canadian Spine Outcomes Research Network (CSORN) database. Surgeon factors were retrieved by survey of each participating surgeon and then linked to their specific patients within the database.METHODSUnivariate analysis was used to compare patient characteristics, imaging measures, and surgeon variables between those that had a fusion and those that had decompression alone. Multivariate backward logistic regression was used to identify the best combination of factors associated with the decision to perform a fusion.RESULTSThis study includes 241 consecutively enrolled patients receiving surgery from 11 surgeons at 7 sites. Patients that had a fusion were younger (65.3±8.3 vs. 68.6±9.7 years, p=.012), had worse ODI scores (45.9±14.7 vs. 40.2±13.5, p=.007), a smaller average disc height (6.1±2.7 vs. 8.0±7.3 mm, p=.005), were more likely to have grade II spondylolisthesis (31% vs. 14%, p=.008), facet distraction (34% vs. 60%, p=.034), and a nonlordotic disc angle (26% vs. 17%, p=.038). The rate of fusion varied by individual surgeon and practice location (p<.001, respectively). Surgeons that were fellowship trained in Canada more frequently fused than those who fellowship trained outside of Canada (76% vs. 57%, p=.027). Surgeons on salary fused more frequently than surgeons remunerated by fee-for-service (80% vs. 64%, p=.004). In the multivariate analysis the clinical factors associated with an increased odds of fusion were decreasing age, decreasing disc height, and increasing ODI score; the radiographic factors were grade II spondylolisthesis and neutral or kyphotic standing disc type; and the surgeon factors were fellowship location, renumeration type and practice region. The odds of having a fusion surgery was more than two times greater for patients with a grade II spondylolisthesis or neutral and/or kyphotic standing disc type (opposed to lordotic standing disc type). Patients whose surgeon completed their fellowship in Canada, or whose surgeon was salaried (opposed to fee-for-service), or whose surgeon practiced in western Canada had twice the odds of having fusion surgery.CONCLUSIONSThe decision to perform a fusion in addition to decompression for LDS is multifactorial. Although patient and radiographic parameters are important in the decision-making process, multiple surgeon factors are associated with the preference of a Canadian spine surgeon to perform a fusion for LDS. Future work is necessary to decrease treatment variability between surgeons and help facilitate the implementation of evidence-based decision making.     

Patients undergoing surgery for lumbar degenerative spinal disorders favor smartphone-based objective self-assessment over paper-based patient-reported outcome measures

Background ContextSmartphone-based applications enable new prospects to monitor symptoms and assess functional outcome in patients with lumbar degenerative spinal disorders. However, little is known regarding patient acceptance and preference towards new modes of digital objective outcome assessment.PurposeTo assess patient preference of an objective smartphone-based outcome measure compared to conventional paper-based subjective methods of outcome assessment.Study designProspective observational cohort study.Patient sampleFourty-nine consecutive patients undergoing surgery for lumbar degenerative spinal disorder.Outcome measuresPatients completed a preference survey to assess different methods of outcome assessment. A 5-level Likert scale ranged from strong disagreement (2 points) over neutral (6 points) to strong agreement (10 points) was used.MethodsPatients self-determined their objective functional impairment using the 6-minute Walking Test application (6WT-app) and completed a set of paper-based patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) before and 6 weeks after surgery. Patients were then asked to rate the methods of outcome assessment in terms of suitability, convenience, and responsiveness to their symptoms.ResultsThe majority of patients considered the 6WT-app a suitable instrument (median 8.0, interquartile range [IQR] 4.0). Patients found the 6WT more convenient (median 10.0, IQR 2.0) than the Zurich Claudication Questionnaire (ZCQ; median 8.0, IQR 4.0, p=.019) and Core Outcome Measure Index (COMI; median 8.0, IQR 4.0, p=.007). There was good agreement that the 6WT-app detects change in physical performance (8.0, IQR 4.0). 78 % of patients considered the 6WT superior in detecting differences in symptoms (vs. 22% for PROMs). Seventy-six percent of patients would select the 6WT over the other, 18% the ZCQ and 6% the COMI. Eighty-two percent of patients indicated their preference to use a smartphone app for the assessment and monitoring of their spine-related symptoms in the future.ConclusionsPatients included in this study favored the smartphone-based evaluation of objective functional impairment over paper-based PROMs. Involving patients more actively by means of digital technology may increase patient compliance and satisfaction as well as diagnostic accuracy.     

Revision risk after pediatric spinal deformity surgery: a nationwide study with 2-year follow-up

BACKGROUND CONTEXTRevision risk after pediatric spine surgery is not well established and varies between deformity etiologies.PURPOSETo report the 2-year revision risk following surgery for primary pediatric spinal deformity in a nationwide cohort and to evaluate potential risk factors and reasons for revision surgery.DESIGNRetrospective nationwide cohort study.PATIENT SAMPLEA national registry study of all pediatric spinal deformity patients undergoing surgery during 2006–2015 (n=1310).OUTCOME MEASURESTwo-year revision risk.METHODSAll patients ≤21 years of age undergoing spinal deformity surgery in Denmark during 2006–2015 were identified by procedure and diagnosis codes in the Danish National Patient Registry (DNPR). Data on revision surgery were retrieved from the DNPR. Patients were categorized in six groups according to etiology. Medical records were reviewed for reason for revision in all patients. Potential risk factors for revision were assessed with multiple logistic regression analyses and included age, etiology, sex, Charlson comorbidity index (CCI), and growth-preserving treatment.RESULTSPatients were categorized according to etiology: idiopathic deformity (53%), neuromuscular deformity (23%), congenital/structural deformity (9%), spondylolisthesis (7%), Scheuermann's kyphosis (5%), and syndromic deformity (3%). Of 1,310 included patients, 9.2% underwent revision surgery within 2 years and 1.5% was revised more than once. Median time to revision was 203 (interquartile range 35–485) days. The multivariable logistic regression found significantly higher odds ratio (OR) for revision in patients with growth-preserving treatment (OR=5.1, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.6–10.1), congenital deformity (OR=2.7, 95% CI 1.3–5.3), spondylolisthesis (OR=3.5, 95% CI 1.9–6.7), Scheuermann kyphosis (OR=3.9, 95% CI 1.9–8.3), and CCI score ≥3 (OR=2.5 95% CI 1.1–5.6). The most common reason for revision was implant failure (32.5%) followed by residual deformity and/or curve progression (15.8%).CONCLUSIONSIn this nationwide study, the 2-year revision risk after primary pediatric spinal deformity surgery is 9.2%. Risk factors for revision are etiology of congenital deformity, spondylolisthesis, Scheuermann kyphosis as well as patients with growth-preserving treatment and higher CCI. The most common reason for revision is implant failure.