Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40731052›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2025

MRI based paraspinal muscle mass predicts early cage subsidence after posterior lumbar interbody fusion.

Zijian Yang, Jie Liang, Dawei Shi, Can Tuo, Yu Wu, Fan Zhang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Zijian Yang *The First College of Clinical Medical Science, China Three Gorges University, Yichang, China.
Jie Liang *The First College of Clinical Medical Science, China Three Gorges University, Yichang, China.
Dawei ShiThe First College of Clinical Medical Science, China Three Gorges University, Yichang, China.
Can TuoThe First College of Clinical Medical Science, China Three Gorges University, Yichang, China.
Yu WuThe First College of Clinical Medical Science, China Three Gorges University, Yichang, China. 13972565385@163.com.
Fan ZhangThe First College of Clinical Medical Science, China Three Gorges University, Yichang, China. zfortho@163.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

As the global population continues to age, the prevalence of lumbar degenerative disease (LDD) has increased. Meanwhile, the clinical efficacy of LDD conventional management remains limited. Posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF) has become the standard surgical intervention. However, cage subsidence (CS) following PLIF poses a persistent clinical challenge. CS has been associated with several risk factors, including age, sex, low bone mineral density (BMD), endplate damage, muscle condition, and cage design. Although muscle health has recently drawn greater attention concerning surgical outcomes and BMD, dependable predictors of subsidence are still lacking. While low BMD is a recognized contributor to CS, the reliability of dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) is debatable. Although quantitative computed tomography (QCT) offers improved accuracy, it can be compromised by calcified structures. Similarly, fat infiltration and inflammation may affect vertebral bone quality (VBQ) and endplate bone quality (EBQ) scores. In this context, the paraspinal muscle index (PMI) and Goutallier classification (GC), both derived from magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), may serve as useful indicators of muscle quality while avoiding radiation exposure and vertebral interference. This study aimed to evaluate the predictive value of PMI and GC for CS after PLIF and compare their performance with other established imaging and bone quality markers. A retrospective review was conducted on 165 patients who underwent single-level PLIF between February 2022 and February 2024. All participants underwent preoperative MRI to assess PMI and GC and evaluate VBQ and EBQ. BMD was quantified using QCT. Patients were categorized into CS and non-CS groups based on postoperative imaging findings. Logistic regression analysis was used to identify risk factors for CS, and the predictive performance of each parameter was evaluated using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves, with the area under the curve (AUC) indicating diagnostic accuracy. Of the 165 patients, 45 (27.3%) developed cage subsidence. Those in the CS group were significantly older on average (70.4 ± 6.99 vs. 64.02 ± 8.24 years, p < 0.001) and had a higher proportion of female patients (p = 0.023). A lower body mass index (BMI ≤ 25 kg/m²) was less frequently observed in the CS group (p = 0.002), while no significant differences were noted for diabetes status or surgical indications. Multivariate analysis identified a lower PMI and higher GC as independent predictors of CS. ROC analysis demonstrated strong predictive performance for PMI (AUC = 0.826), GC (AUC = 0.786), QCT (AUC = 0.894), VBQ (AUC = 0.814), and EBQ (AUC = 0.719), with QCT yielding the highest diagnostic accuracy. PMI was inversely correlated with the extent of subsidence and positively associated with BMD. MRI-based assessments of muscle quality, including PMI and GC, offer reliable and non-invasive predictors of cage subsidence following PLIF. These measures may serve as practical tools in preoperative planning, enhancing risk stratification while minimizing radiation exposure.

Indexed as

Lumbar VertebraeMagnetic Resonance ImagingParaspinal MusclesSpinal FusionAgedBone DensityFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedRetrospective StudiesRisk FactorsCage subsidenceGoutallier classificationLumbar degenerative diseaseMagnetic resonance imagingParaspinal muscle indexPosterior lumbar interbody fusion

Identifiers

PMID40731052
PMCPMC12307921

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.