Cargando…
Atrofia paraespinal postoperatoria. ¿El abordaje importa?
OBJECTIVE: To compare the level of post-op muscle atrophy related to the different approaches used in segmental lumbar fusion for degenerative disease (midline vs. Wiltse vs. MIS TLIF). MATERIALS AND METHODS: An observational, cross sectional, multicenter, descriptive and retrospective study was per...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd
2018
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6282173/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30595965 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/sni.sni_310_18 |
_version_ | 1783378940593700864 |
---|---|
author | Guiroy, Alfredo Landriel, Federico Zanardi, Carlos Molina, Federico Fernández Gagliardi, Martín Ciancio, Alejandro Morales Hem, Santiago Picard, Nelson |
author_facet | Guiroy, Alfredo Landriel, Federico Zanardi, Carlos Molina, Federico Fernández Gagliardi, Martín Ciancio, Alejandro Morales Hem, Santiago Picard, Nelson |
author_sort | Guiroy, Alfredo |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVE: To compare the level of post-op muscle atrophy related to the different approaches used in segmental lumbar fusion for degenerative disease (midline vs. Wiltse vs. MIS TLIF). MATERIALS AND METHODS: An observational, cross sectional, multicenter, descriptive and retrospective study was performed including a series of patients undergoing surgery for lumbar degenerative disease. We analyzed 45 patients (24 females), with a mean age of 58.7 years, undergoing surgery in 5 surgical centers between 2015 and 2018. A one-level instrumented fusion, from L3 to S1 was performed (7 cases L3-L4, 25 cases L4-L5 and 13 cases L5-S1). In 15 cases, a midline approach was used; in 15, a Wiltse approach was used, and in 15 cases, an MIS TLIF approach was used. All the patients were studied preoperatively and for at least 6 months after surgery (mean follow-up 14.6 months) with magnetic resonance imaging. The images were analyzed by three specialists in spine surgery. Two variables were considered to compare the level of atrophy before and after surgery: cross-sectional area (CSA) of the multifidus muscle (MM) and spinal erector muscles (SEM) and the fat infiltration level (FI) using the Kjaer visual classification. The analyses were conducted using the RStudio (1.1.383 version) statistical software, and the P values obtained were compared using the Wilcoxon rank-sum test. RESULTS: No significant differences were found between the approaches in terms of MM atrophy. The comparison of P for CSA and the SEM evidenced differences between MIS TLIF versus midline (P = 0.018) and midline versus Wiltse (P = 0.027). CONCLUSION: The minimally invasive approaches used for decompression and lumbar monosegmental arthrodesis had more impact on the EMs than on the MM. Randomized controlled trials might be useful to validate the results of this investigation. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6282173 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2018 |
publisher | Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-62821732018-12-28 Atrofia paraespinal postoperatoria. ¿El abordaje importa? Guiroy, Alfredo Landriel, Federico Zanardi, Carlos Molina, Federico Fernández Gagliardi, Martín Ciancio, Alejandro Morales Hem, Santiago Picard, Nelson Surg Neurol Int Original Article OBJECTIVE: To compare the level of post-op muscle atrophy related to the different approaches used in segmental lumbar fusion for degenerative disease (midline vs. Wiltse vs. MIS TLIF). MATERIALS AND METHODS: An observational, cross sectional, multicenter, descriptive and retrospective study was performed including a series of patients undergoing surgery for lumbar degenerative disease. We analyzed 45 patients (24 females), with a mean age of 58.7 years, undergoing surgery in 5 surgical centers between 2015 and 2018. A one-level instrumented fusion, from L3 to S1 was performed (7 cases L3-L4, 25 cases L4-L5 and 13 cases L5-S1). In 15 cases, a midline approach was used; in 15, a Wiltse approach was used, and in 15 cases, an MIS TLIF approach was used. All the patients were studied preoperatively and for at least 6 months after surgery (mean follow-up 14.6 months) with magnetic resonance imaging. The images were analyzed by three specialists in spine surgery. Two variables were considered to compare the level of atrophy before and after surgery: cross-sectional area (CSA) of the multifidus muscle (MM) and spinal erector muscles (SEM) and the fat infiltration level (FI) using the Kjaer visual classification. The analyses were conducted using the RStudio (1.1.383 version) statistical software, and the P values obtained were compared using the Wilcoxon rank-sum test. RESULTS: No significant differences were found between the approaches in terms of MM atrophy. The comparison of P for CSA and the SEM evidenced differences between MIS TLIF versus midline (P = 0.018) and midline versus Wiltse (P = 0.027). CONCLUSION: The minimally invasive approaches used for decompression and lumbar monosegmental arthrodesis had more impact on the EMs than on the MM. Randomized controlled trials might be useful to validate the results of this investigation. Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2018-11-26 /pmc/articles/PMC6282173/ /pubmed/30595965 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/sni.sni_310_18 Text en Copyright: © 2018 Surgical Neurology International http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0 This is an open access journal, and articles are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as appropriate credit is given and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms. |
spellingShingle | Original Article Guiroy, Alfredo Landriel, Federico Zanardi, Carlos Molina, Federico Fernández Gagliardi, Martín Ciancio, Alejandro Morales Hem, Santiago Picard, Nelson Atrofia paraespinal postoperatoria. ¿El abordaje importa? |
title | Atrofia paraespinal postoperatoria. ¿El abordaje importa? |
title_full | Atrofia paraespinal postoperatoria. ¿El abordaje importa? |
title_fullStr | Atrofia paraespinal postoperatoria. ¿El abordaje importa? |
title_full_unstemmed | Atrofia paraespinal postoperatoria. ¿El abordaje importa? |
title_short | Atrofia paraespinal postoperatoria. ¿El abordaje importa? |
title_sort | atrofia paraespinal postoperatoria. ¿el abordaje importa? |
topic | Original Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6282173/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30595965 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/sni.sni_310_18 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT guiroyalfredo atrofiaparaespinalpostoperatoriaelabordajeimporta AT landrielfederico atrofiaparaespinalpostoperatoriaelabordajeimporta AT zanardicarlos atrofiaparaespinalpostoperatoriaelabordajeimporta AT molinafedericofernandez atrofiaparaespinalpostoperatoriaelabordajeimporta AT gagliardimartin atrofiaparaespinalpostoperatoriaelabordajeimporta AT ciancioalejandromorales atrofiaparaespinalpostoperatoriaelabordajeimporta AT hemsantiago atrofiaparaespinalpostoperatoriaelabordajeimporta AT picardnelson atrofiaparaespinalpostoperatoriaelabordajeimporta |