Does pre-operative magnetic resonance imaging of the lumbar multifidus muscle predict clinical outcomes following lumbar spinal decompression for symptomatic spinal stenosis?

PurposeTo investigate whether pre-operative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the lumbar multifidus muscle (LMM) would predict clinical outcomes following lumbar spinal decompression for symptomatic spinal stenosis.MethodsA prospective cohort of patients with symptomatic neurogenic claudication, documented spinal stenosis on pre-operative MRI underwent spinal decompression. All subjects completed standardised outcome measures (Core Outcome Measures Index (COMI), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI v2.1) pre-operatively, 1 and 2 years post-surgery. Surgery was performed using a standardised lumbar spinous process osteotomy for access, followed by a decompression of the central canal, lateral recess and foraminal zones as indicated by the pre-operative MRI. Lumbar MRI scans were evaluated by two independent observers who assessed the axial CSA of the LMM bilaterally and the degree of muscle atrophy according to the Kader classification (2000). Changes in COMI and ODI scores at 1 and 2 years were investigated for statistically significant correlations with CSA of LMM and Kader grading. Statistical analyses utilised Student’s t test, kappa coefficient for inter-observer agreement and Bland–Altman Limits of Agreement (BALOA).Results66 patients (41 female) aged between 29 and 86 years underwent single-level decompression in 44, two-level decompression in 16 and three-level decompression in 6 cases. No significant correlation was observed between improvements in ODI and COMI relative to age, degree of stenosis, posterior fat thickness or psoas CSA. Those subjects with the greatest LMM atrophy relative to psoas CSA and L5 vertebral body area on pre-operative MRI had the least absolute improvement in both ODI and COMI scores (p = 0.006).ConclusionsReduced LMM CSA (<8.5 cm2) and muscle atrophy were associated with less favourable outcomes following lumbar spinal decompression. Pre-operative CSA of LMM appeared to be a more reliable predictor of post-operative clinical outcomes compared to the Kader Grading Score. This is the first study to investigate the prognostic value of pre-operative MRI appearance and CSA of LMM with respect to post-operative outcome following lumbar decompression surgery. Healthy pre-operative LMM is associated with better outcomes following lumbar spinal decompression.

[1]  J. Ryu,et al.  Association between Cross-sectional Areas of Lumbar Muscles on Magnetic Resonance Imaging and Chronicity of Low Back Pain , 2011, Annals of rehabilitation medicine.

[2]  I A Stokes,et al.  Stability increase of the lumbar spine with different muscle groups: a biomechanical in vitro study. , 1995, Spine.

[3]  Kern Singh,et al.  Quantification of Multifidus Atrophy and Fatty Infiltration Following a Minimally Invasive Microdiscectomy , 2015, International Journal of Spine Surgery.

[4]  M. Panjabi.  The stabilizing system of the spine. Part II. Neutral zone and instability hypothesis. , 1992, Journal of spinal disorders.

[5]  C. Kang,et al.  MRI of paraspinal muscles in lumbar degenerative kyphosis patients and control patients with chronic low back pain. , 2007, Clinical radiology.

[6]  F W Smith,et al.  Correlation between the MRI changes in the lumbar multifidus muscles and leg pain. , 2000, Clinical radiology.

[7]  B. Weiner,et al.  Spinous process osteotomies to facilitate lumbar decompressive surgery. , 1999, Spine.

[8]  J. Hides,et al.  Changes in multifidus and abdominal muscle size in response to microgravity: possible implications for low back pain research , 2016, European Spine Journal.

[9]  O. Airaksinen,et al.  Density of lumbar muscles 4 years after decompressive spinal surgery , 2004, European Spine Journal.

[10]  N Bogduk,et al.  The morphology of the human lumbar multifidus. , 1986, Clinical biomechanics.

[11]  Constantin Schizas,et al.  Qualitative Grading of Severity of Lumbar Spinal Stenosis Based on the Morphology of the Dural Sac on Magnetic Resonance Images , 2010, Spine.

[12]  Jian He,et al.  An Assessment of the Intra- and Inter-reliability of the Lumbar Paraspinal Muscle Parameters Using CT Scan and Magnetic Resonance Imaging , 2011, Spine.

[13]  W. Skalli,et al.  Erector Spinae Muscle Changes on Magnetic Resonance Imaging Following Lumbar Surgery Through a Posterior Approach , 2007, Spine.

[14]  A. Shirazi-Adl,et al.  Cross-sectional area of human trunk paraspinal muscles before and after posterior lumbar surgery using magnetic resonance imaging , 2016, European Spine Journal.

[15]  M. Olona,et al.  Surgically repaired massive rotator cuff tears: MRI of tendon integrity, muscle fatty degeneration, and muscle atrophy correlated with intraoperative and clinical findings. , 2005, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[16]  K. Michaëlsson,et al.  Obesity Is Associated With Inferior Results After Surgery for Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: A Study of 2633 Patients From the Swedish Spine Register , 2013, Spine.

[17]  J S Osberg,et al.  Kappa coefficient calculation using multiple ratings per subject: a special communication. , 1989, Physical therapy.

[18]  Rong-Sen Yang,et al.  Image changes of paraspinal muscles and clinical correlations in patients with unilateral lumbar spinal stenosis , 2014, European Spine Journal.

[19]  J. Hides,et al.  The relationship of transversus abdominis and lumbar multifidus clinical muscle tests in patients with chronic low back pain. , 2011, Manual therapy.

[20]  J. Buford,et al.  Between-day repeatability and symmetry of multifidus cross-sectional area measured using ultrasound imaging. , 2006, The Journal of orthopaedic and sports physical therapy.

[21]  S. Chung,et al.  Comparison of Multifidus Muscle Atrophy and Trunk Extension Muscle Strength: Percutaneous Versus Open Pedicle Screw Fixation , 2005, Spine.

[22]  M. McCarthy,et al.  A Comparison of Magnetic Resonance Imaging Muscle Fat Content in the Lumbar Paraspinal Muscles with Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in Patients with Lumbar Degenerative Disk Disease and Focal Disk Prolapse , 2016, Global spine journal.

[23]  B. Strömqvist,et al.  Impact of Pain on Function and Health Related Quality of Life in Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: A Register Study of 14,821 Patients , 2013, Spine.

[24]  A. Mcgregor,et al.  The outcome of spinal decompression surgery 5 years on , 2007, European Spine Journal.

[25]  Choll W. Kim,et al.  Architectural analysis and intraoperative measurements demonstrate the unique design of the multifidus muscle for lumbar spine stability. , 2009, The Journal of bone and joint surgery. American volume.

[26]  V. Leinonen,et al.  Lumbar paraspinal and biceps brachii muscle function and movement perception in lumbar spinal stenosis , 2013, European Spine Journal.

[27]  C. Richardson,et al.  Multifidus Muscle Recovery Is Not Automatic After Resolution of Acute, First‐Episode Low Back Pain , 1996, Spine.

[28]  C. Lee,et al.  Long-term functional outcomes after repair of rotator cuff tears correlated with atrophy of the supraspinatus muscles on magnetic resonance images. , 2008, Journal of shoulder and elbow surgery.

[29]  Y. Toyama,et al.  Radiographic Predictors of Residual Low Back Pain After Laminectomy for Lumbar Spinal Canal Stenosis: Minimum 5-year Follow-up , 2008, Journal of spinal disorders & techniques.

[30]  T J Masaryk,et al.  Degenerative disk disease: assessment of changes in vertebral body marrow with MR imaging. , 1988, Radiology.

[31]  F. Zhao,et al.  Multifidus muscle changes and clinical effects of one-level posterior lumbar interbody fusion: minimally invasive procedure versus conventional open approach , 2010, European Spine Journal.

[32]  J. Hartvigsen,et al.  Responsiveness and minimal clinically important difference for pain and disability instruments in low back pain patients , 2006, BMC musculoskeletal disorders.

[33]  P. Eysel,et al.  Predictors of surgical, general and follow-up complications in lumbar spinal stenosis relative to patient age as emerged from the Spine Tango Registry , 2012, European Spine Journal.

[34]  S. Savolainen,et al.  Preoperative Predictors for Postoperative Clinical Outcome in Lumbar Spinal Stenosis: Systematic Review , 2006, Spine.

[35]  D. Altman,et al.  STATISTICAL METHODS FOR ASSESSING AGREEMENT BETWEEN TWO METHODS OF CLINICAL MEASUREMENT , 1986, The Lancet.

[36]  V. Leinonen,et al.  The effect of decompressive surgery on lumbar paraspinal and biceps brachii muscle function and movement perception in lumbar spinal stenosis: a 2-year follow-up , 2016, European Spine Journal.

[37]  T. Tsuji,et al.  Postoperative Change of the Cross-Sectional Area of Back Musculature After 5 Surgical Procedures as Assessed by Magnetic Resonance Imaging , 2006, Journal of spinal disorders & techniques.