Saxion University of Applied Sciences, Research Group Smart Health, Enschede, the Netherlands.
University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Pain Center, Groningen, The Netherlands.
BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2022 Jul 16;23(1):680. doi: 10.1186/s12891-022-05590-5.
Inconsistent descriptions of Lumbar multifidus (LM) morphology were previously identified, especially in research applying ultrasonography (US), hampering its clinical applicability with regard to diagnosis and therapy. The aim of this study is to determine the LM-sonoanatomy by comparing high-resolution reconstructions from a 3-D digital spine compared to standard LM-ultrasonography.
An observational study was carried out. From three deeply frozen human tissue blocks of the lumbosacral spine, a large series of consecutive photographs at 78 μm interval were acquired and reformatted into 3-D blocks. This enabled the reconstruction of (semi-)oblique cross-sections that could match US-images obtained from a healthy volunteer. Transverse and oblique short-axis views were compared from the most caudal insertion of LM to L1.
Based on the anatomical reconstructions, we could distinguish the LM from the adjacent erector spinae (ES) in the standard US imaging of the lower spine. At the lumbosacral junction, LM is the only dorsal muscle facing the surface. From L5 upwards, the ES progresses from lateral to medial. A clear distinction between deep and superficial LM could not be discerned. We were only able to identify five separate bands between every lumbar spinous processes and the dorsal part of the sacrum in the caudal anatomical cross-sections, but not in the standard US images.
The detailed cross-sectional LM-sonoanatomy and reconstructions facilitate the interpretations of standard LM US-imaging, the position of the separate LM-bands, the details of deep interspinal muscles, and demarcation of the LM versus the ES. Guidelines for electrode positioning in EMG studies should be refined to establish reliable and verifiable findings. For clinical practice, this study can serve as a guide for a better characterisation of LM compared to ES and for a more reliable placement of US-probe in biofeedback.
先前对腰椎多裂肌(LM)形态的描述不一致,尤其是在应用超声(US)的研究中,这阻碍了其在诊断和治疗方面的临床应用。本研究旨在通过比较 3D 数字脊柱的高分辨率重建与标准 LM 超声来确定 LM 的超声解剖结构。
进行了一项观察性研究。从三个腰骶部脊柱的深冷冻组织块中,以 78μm 的间隔获取了一系列连续的照片,并重新格式化成立体块。这使得能够重建(半)斜横截面,这些横截面可以与从健康志愿者获得的 US 图像匹配。比较了从 LM 最尾端插入到 L1 的横断和斜短轴视图。
基于解剖重建,我们可以在标准的下脊柱 US 成像中区分相邻的竖脊肌(ES)中的 LM。在腰骶交界处,LM 是唯一面向表面的背侧肌肉。从 L5 向上,ES 从外侧向内侧发展。在深部和浅部 LM 之间无法清晰区分。在尾端解剖横截面上,我们只能在每个腰椎棘突和骶骨背部分别识别出五个单独的 LM 带,但在标准 US 图像中无法识别。
详细的横截 LM 超声解剖结构和重建有助于解释标准的 LM US 成像、单独的 LM 带的位置、深部椎间肌的细节以及 LM 与 ES 的区分。应细化肌电图研究中电极定位的指南,以建立可靠和可验证的发现。对于临床实践,与 ES 相比,本研究可作为更好地描述 LM 的指南,并可更可靠地放置 US 探头进行生物反馈。