Rosenstein Brent, Burdick Jessica, Roussac Alexa, Rye Meaghan, Naghdi Neda, Valentin Stephanie, Licka Theresia, Sean Monica, Tétreault Pascal, Elliott Jim, Fortin Maryse
Department of Health, Kinesiology and Applied Physiology, Concordia University, Montreal, Canada.
Department of Health, Kinesiology and Applied Physiology, Concordia University, Montreal, Canada.
J Biomech. 2024 Jan;163:111928. doi: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2024.111928. Epub 2024 Jan 10.
It remains unclear whether paraspinal muscle fatty infiltration in low back pain (LBP) is i) solely intramuscular, ii) is lying outside the epimysium between the muscle and fascial plane (epimuscular) or iii) or combination of both, as imaging studies often use different segmentation protocols that are not thoroughly described. Epimuscular fat possibly disturbs force generation of paraspinal muscles, but is seldomly explored. This project aimed to 1) compare epimuscular fat in participants with and without chronic LBP, and 2) determine whether epimuscular fat is different across lumbar spinal levels and associated with BMI, age, sex and LBP status, duration or intensity. Fat and water lumbosacral MRIs of 50 chronic LBP participants and 41 healthy controls were used. The presence and extent of epimuscular fat for the paraspinal muscle group (erector spinae and multifidus) was assessed using a qualitative score (0-5 scale; 0 = no epimuscular fat and 5 = epimuscular fat present along the entire muscle) and quantitative manual segmentation method. Chi-squared tests evaluated associations between qualitative epimuscular fat ratings and LBP status at each lumbar level. Bivariate and partial spearman's rho correlation assessed relationships between quantitative and qualitative epimuscular fat with participants' characteristics. Epimuscular fat was more frequent at the L4-L5 (X = 13.781, p = 0.017) and L5-S1 level (X = 27.825, p < 0.001) in participants with LBP compared to controls, which was not found for the higher lumbar levels. The total qualitative score (combined from all levels) showed a significant positive correlation with BMI, age, sex (female) and LBP status (r = 0.23-0.55; p < 0.05). Similarly, the total area of epimuscular fat (quantitative measure) was significantly correlated with BMI, age and LBP status (r = 0.26-0.57; p < 0.05). No correlations were found between epimuscular fat and LBP duration or intensity. Paraspinal muscle epimuscular fat is more common in chronic LBP patients. The functional implications of epimuscular fat should be further explored.
目前尚不清楚下腰痛(LBP)患者椎旁肌脂肪浸润是:i)仅存在于肌肉内部;ii)位于肌外膜外侧的肌肉与筋膜平面之间(肌外膜性);还是iii)两者皆有,因为影像学研究通常采用不同的分割方案,且未详细描述。肌外膜脂肪可能会干扰椎旁肌的力量产生,但很少被研究。本项目旨在:1)比较慢性下腰痛患者和非慢性下腰痛患者的肌外膜脂肪;2)确定肌外膜脂肪在腰椎各节段是否存在差异,以及是否与体重指数(BMI)、年龄、性别和下腰痛状态、病程或强度相关。使用了50名慢性下腰痛患者和41名健康对照者的腰骶部脂肪和水的磁共振成像(MRI)。采用定性评分(0 - 5分;0 = 无肌外膜脂肪,5 = 沿整块肌肉均有肌外膜脂肪)和定量手动分割方法评估椎旁肌群(竖脊肌和多裂肌)肌外膜脂肪的存在情况和范围。卡方检验评估每个腰椎节段肌外膜脂肪定性评分与下腰痛状态之间的关联。双变量和偏斯皮尔曼等级相关分析评估定量和定性肌外膜脂肪与参与者特征之间的关系。与对照组相比,下腰痛患者在L4 - L5(X = 13.781,p = 0.017)和L5 - S1节段的肌外膜脂肪更常见,而在较高腰椎节段未发现这种情况。总定性评分(所有节段综合)与BMI、年龄、性别(女性)和下腰痛状态呈显著正相关(r = 0.23 - 0.55;p < 0.05)。同样,肌外膜脂肪总面积(定量测量)与BMI、年龄和下腰痛状态显著相关(r = 0.26 - 0.57;p < 0.05)。未发现肌外膜脂肪与下腰痛病程或强度之间存在相关性。椎旁肌肌外膜脂肪在慢性下腰痛患者中更为常见。应进一步探讨肌外膜脂肪的功能意义。