Comparison of lumbar muscle morphology in patients with chronic nonspecific low back pain with and without clinical lumbar segmental instability.

Item request has been placed! ×
Item request cannot be made. ×
loading   Processing Request
Read Online Read More Add to Saved list
  • Additional Information
    • Source:
      Publisher: Public Library of Science Country of Publication: United States NLM ID: 101285081 Publication Model: eCollection Cited Medium: Internet ISSN: 1932-6203 (Electronic) Linking ISSN: 19326203 NLM ISO Abbreviation: PLoS One Subsets: MEDLINE
    • Publication Information:
      Original Publication: San Francisco, CA : Public Library of Science
    • Subject Terms:
      Low Back Pain*/diagnostic imaging ; Low Back Pain*/pathology ; Spinal Diseases*/pathology ; Joint Instability*/diagnostic imaging; Humans ; Case-Control Studies ; Lumbar Vertebrae/diagnostic imaging ; Lumbar Vertebrae/pathology ; Muscular Atrophy/pathology ; Magnetic Resonance Imaging ; Paraspinal Muscles/anatomy & histology
    • Abstract:
      Objectives: Evaluation of spinal muscle morphology may be critical because of its impact on segmental stability and control of the lumbar spine in the subset of patients with clinical lumbar segmental instability (LSI). The purpose of this study was to compare lumbar muscle morphology in CNLBP patients with clinical LSI, CNLBP patients without clinical LSI.
      Methods: This case-control study included 30 patients with CNLBP (15 with clinical LSI and 15 without clinical LSI) and 15 subjects without LBP. Axial magnetic resonance images from the L2 to S1 lumbar levels were used to evaluate the morphology of the lumbar muscles.
      Results: A significant increase in the muscle-to-fat infiltration index and a significant decrease in the relative muscle cross-sectional area (rmCSA) of the multifidus muscle at the L3-L4 to L5-S1 levels were observed in both CNLBP groups compared to the control group (p<0.05). The mean erector spinae mean rmCSA was significantly greater in the clinical LSI group compared to the control group (SMD = 0.853, 95% CI = 0.105 to -1.6, P = 0.044) and also compared to the CNLBP without clinical LSI (SMD = 0.894, 95% CI = -1.645 to -0.144, P = 0.030) at the L4-L5 level.
      Conclusions: The atrophic changes of the multifidus muscle, in CNLBP patients with or without clinical LSI was observed. However, hypertrophic changes of the erector spinae muscle at the L4-L5 lumbar level were observed only in the clinical LSI group. Psaos major did not show significant atrophic or hypertrophic changes.
      Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
      (Copyright: © 2024 Mahmoudi Alami et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.)
    • References:
      Clin Anat. 2022 Sep;35(6):762-772. (PMID: 35445452)
      Lancet. 2017 Feb 18;389(10070):736-747. (PMID: 27745712)
      Pain Med. 2016 Aug;17(8):1436-46. (PMID: 26814258)
      Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2002 Jun;83(6):816-21. (PMID: 12048661)
      J Neurosurg Spine. 2016 May;24(5):679-85. (PMID: 26771373)
      Pain. 2016 Apr;157(4):791-796. (PMID: 26670465)
      Br J Radiol. 2011 Aug;84(1004):709-13. (PMID: 21081573)
      Eur Spine J. 2013 Sep;22(9):1965-71. (PMID: 23543369)
      Ann Rehabil Med. 2017 Oct;41(5):801-807. (PMID: 29201819)
      Man Ther. 2012 Dec;17(6):584-8. (PMID: 22784801)
      Musculoskelet Sci Pract. 2020 Dec;50:102224. (PMID: 33099174)
      Eur Spine J. 2014 May;23(5):999-1006. (PMID: 24395004)
      PM R. 2015 Dec;7(12):1269-1281. (PMID: 25952771)
      Physiother Res Int. 2024 Jan;29(1):e2047. (PMID: 37598310)
      Spine J. 2022 Apr;22(4):660-676. (PMID: 34718177)
      Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2005 Sep;86(9):1753-62. (PMID: 16181938)
      Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021 Apr 12;18(8):. (PMID: 33921317)
      Global Spine J. 2018 Oct;8(7):716-721. (PMID: 30443482)
      Eur Spine J. 2010 Jul;19(7):1136-44. (PMID: 20033739)
      J Back Musculoskelet Rehabil. 2015;28(4):675-80. (PMID: 25408122)
      PLoS One. 2017 Nov 8;12(11):e0187765. (PMID: 29117256)
      Eur J Appl Physiol Occup Physiol. 1991;63(6):424-9. (PMID: 1765055)
      Caspian J Intern Med. 2015 Spring;6(2):98-102. (PMID: 26221508)
      J Electromyogr Kinesiol. 2003 Aug;13(4):371-9. (PMID: 12832167)
      PM R. 2010 Feb;2(2):142-6; quiz 1 p following 167. (PMID: 20193941)
      J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2017 Mar;47(3):173-179. (PMID: 28158957)
      Orthopedics. 2017 Sep 1;40(5):e793-e800. (PMID: 28585998)
      Pain Physician. 2016 Sep-Oct;19(7):E985-E1000. (PMID: 27676689)
    • Publication Date:
      Date Created: 20240404 Date Completed: 20240408 Latest Revision: 20240408
    • Publication Date:
      20240408
    • Accession Number:
      PMC10994386
    • Accession Number:
      10.1371/journal.pone.0301726
    • Accession Number:
      38574091