ArticleAsian spine journal2024
Clinical use of quantitative computed tomography to evaluate the effect of less paraspinal muscle damage on bone mineral density changes after lumbar interbody fusion.
Article in Asian spine journal, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
STUDY
designA retrospective cohort study. PURPOSE: This study aimed to assess the reliability of quantitative computed tomography (QCT) in measuring bone mineral density (BMD) of instrumented vertebrae and investigate the effect of less paraspinal muscle damage on BMD changes after lumbar interbody fusion. OVERVIEW OF LITERATURE: Patients always experience a decrease in vertebral BMD after lumbar interbody fusion. However, to the best of our knowledge, no study has analyzed the effect of paraspinal muscles on BMD changes.
methodsThis retrospective analysis included a total of 155 patients who underwent single-level lumbar fusion, with 81 patients in the traditional group and 74 patients in the Wiltse group (less paraspinal muscle damage). QCT was used to measure the volumetric BMD (vBMD), Hounsfield unit value, and cross-sectional area of the paraspinal muscles at the upper instrumented vertebrae (UIV), vertebrae one segment above the UIV (UIV+1), and the vertebrae one segment above the UIV+1 (UIV+2). Statistical analyses were performed.
resultsNo significant differences in general data were observed between the two groups (p>0.05). Strong correlations were noted between the preoperative and 1-week postoperative vBMD of each segment (p<0.01), with no significant difference between the two time points in both groups (p>0.05). Vertebral BMD loss was significantly higher in UIV+1 and UIV+2 in the traditional group than in the Wiltse group (-13.6%±19.1% vs. -4.2%±16.5%, -10.8%±20.3% vs. -0.9%±37.0%; p<0.05). However, no statistically significant difference was observed in the percent vBMD changes in the UIV segment between the two groups (37.7%±70.1% vs. 36.1%±78.7%, p>0.05).
conclusionsQCT can reliably determine BMD in the instrumented spine after lumbar interbody fusion. With QCT, we found that reducing paraspinal muscle destruction through the Wiltse approach during surgery can help preserve the adjacent vertebral BMD; however, it does not help increase the BMD in the instrumented vertebrae.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.