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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Guiroy, Alfredo, Landriel, Federico, Zanardi, Carlos, Molina, Federico Fernández, Gagliardi, Martín, Ciancio, Alejandro Morales, Hem, Santiago, Picard, Nelson
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