Dataset Information

Inconsistent descriptions of lumbar multifidus morphology: A scoping review.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Lumbar multifidus (LM) is regarded as the major stabilizing muscle of the spine. The effects of exercise therapy in low back pain (LBP) are attributed to this muscle. A current literature review is warranted, however, given the complexity of LM morphology and the inconsistency of anatomical descriptions in the literature.

Methods

Scoping review of studies on LM morphology including major anatomy atlases. All relevant studies were searched in PubMed (Medline) and EMBASE until June 2019. Anatomy atlases were retrieved from multiple university libraries and online. All studies and atlases were screened for the following LM parameters: location, imaging methods, spine levels, muscle trajectory, muscle thickness, cross-sectional area, and diameter. The quality of the studies and atlases was also assessed using a five-item evaluation system.

Results

In all, 303 studies and 19 anatomy atlases were included in this review. In most studies, LM morphology was determined by MRI, ultrasound imaging, or drawings - particularly for levels L4-S1. In 153 studies, LM is described as a superficial muscle only, in 72 studies as a deep muscle only, and in 35 studies as both superficial and deep. Anatomy atlases predominantly depict LM as a deep muscle covered by the erector spinae and thoracolumbar fascia. About 42% of the studies had high quality scores, with 39% having moderate scores and 19% having low scores. The quality of figures in anatomy atlases was ranked as high in one atlas, moderate in 15 atlases, and low in 3 atlases.

Discussion

Anatomical studies of LM exhibit inconsistent findings, describing its location as superficial (50%), deep (25%), or both (12%). This is in sharp contrast to anatomy atlases, which depict LM predominantly as deep muscle. Within the limitations of the self-developed quality-assessment tool, high-quality scores were identified in a majority of studies (42%), but in only one anatomy atlas.

Conclusions

We identified a lack of standardization in the depiction and description of LM morphology. This could affect the precise understanding of its role in background and therapy in LBP patients. Standardization of research methodology on LM morphology is recommended. Anatomy atlases should be updated on LM morphology.

SUBMITTER: Hofste A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7236939 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:AimsTo (1) give an overview of rebel nurse leadership by summarising descriptions of positive deviance, tempered radicals and healthcare rebels; (2) examine the competences of nurse rebel leadership; and (3) describe factors that stimulate or hinder the development of rebel nurse leadership.BackgroundResearch shows nurses have lower intention to leave their jobs when they can control their work practices, show leadership and provide the best care. However, organisational rules and regulations do not always fit the provision of good care, which challenges nurses to show leadership and deviate from the rules and regulations to benefit the patient. Three concepts describe this practice: positive deviance, healthcare rebels and tempered radicals.DesignScoping review using the Joanna Briggs Institute methodology and PRISMA-ScR checklist.MethodsPapers describing positive deviance, healthcare rebels and tempered radicals in nursing were identified by searching Scopus, CINAHL, PubMed and PsycINFO. After data extraction, these three concepts were analysed to study the content of descriptions and definitions, competences and stimulating and hindering factors.ResultsOf 2705 identified papers, 25 were included. The concept descriptions yielded three aspects: (1) positive deviance approach, (2) unconventional and non-confirmative behaviour and (3) relevance of networks and relationships. The competences were the ability to: (1) collaborate in/outside the organisation, (2) gain and share expert (evidence-based) knowledge, (3) critically reflect on working habits/problems in daily care and dare to challenge the status quo and (4) generate ideas to improve care. The factors that stimulate or hinder the development of rebel nurse leadership are as follows: (1) dialogue and reflection, (2) networking conditions and (3) the managers' role.ConclusionsBased on our analysis, we summarise the descriptions given of rebel nurse leadership, the mentioned competences and provide an overview of the factors that stimulate or hinder rebel nurse leadership.Relevance to clinical practiceThe descriptions produced in this review of rebel nurse leadership and the stimulating or hindering factors listed should help nurses and managers encourage rebel leadership.

Project description:Study designProspective observational study-basic science (Level 1).ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to compare expression of functional groups of genes within the atrophic, myogenic, fibrogenic, adipogenic, and inflammatory pathways between paraspinal muscle biopsies from individuals with acute and chronic lumbar spine pathology.Summary of background dataLow back pain is a complex and multifactorial condition that affects a majority of the general population annually. Changes in muscle tissue composition (i.e., fatty and fibrotic infiltration) are a common feature in individuals with lumbar spine pathology associated with low back pain, which often results in functional loss. Understanding the molecular underpinnings of these degenerative changes in different phases of disease progression may improve disease prevention and treatment specificity.MethodsIntraoperative biopsies of the multifidus muscle were obtained from individuals undergoing surgery for acute (<6-month duration) or chronic (>6-month duration) lumbar spine pathology. Expression of 42 genes related to myogenesis, atrophy, adipogenesis, metabolism, inflammation, and fibrosis were measured in 33 samples (eight acute, 25 chronic) using qPCR, and tissue composition of fat, muscle, and fibrosis was quantified using histology.ResultsWe found that tissue composition of the biopsies was heterogeneous, resulting in a trend toward lower RNA yields in biopsies with higher proportions of fat (r <-0.39, P?<?0.1). There were no significant differences in gene expression patterns for atrophy (P?>?0.635), adipogenesis (P?>?0.317), myogenesis (P?>?0.320), or inflammatory (P?>?0.413) genes after adjusting for the proportion of muscle, fat, and connective tissue. However, in the fibrogenesis pathway, we found significant upregulation of CTGF (P?=?0.046), and trends for upregulation of COL1A1 (P?=?0.061), and downregulation of MMP1 and MMP9 (P?=?0.061) in the chronic group.ConclusionThere is increased fibrogenic gene expression in individuals with chronic disease when compared to acute disease, without significant differences in atrophic, myogenic, adipogenic, or inflammatory pathways, suggesting increased efforts should be made to prevent or reverse fibrogenesis to improve patient function in this population.Level of evidenceN/A.

Project description:ObjectiveTo compare postoperative imaging results, clinical outcomes and complications between the multifidus muscle bundle (MMB) approach and the conventional open (CO) approach in one-level posterior lumbar interbody fusion (PLIF).MethodsBased on the inclusion and exclusion criteria, 201 of 351 patients in our hospital were enrolled in this prospective study and underwent MMB-PLIF or CO-PLIF randomly: 111 patients in the MMB-PLIF group and 90 patients in the CO-PLIF group. A total of 100 patients failed to be followed up in the following 7-9 years. Therefore, in this study, 52 patients of the MMB group and 49 patients of the CO group were included. We evaluated the differences in terms of multifidus atrophy rate, intervertebral disc height and segmental lordosis restoration of the operation segment, lumbar lordosis restoration, fusion rate, visual analogue scale (VAS) for back and leg pain, Oswestry disability index (ODI), complication rates, and patient satisfaction rates between the two groups. Correlation between multifidus muscle degeneration and the incidence of complications was investigated, and we compared the multifidus muscle degeneration rate between patients with or without intractable back pain or adjacent segment degeneration.ResultsThere were no significant differences in age, sex, body mass index (BMI), diagnosis, segments distribution, and mean follow-up time between the MMB-PLIF group and the CO-PLIF group. In addition, no differences regarding sex, age, or BMI were found between the lost follow-up group and the successful follow-up group. In regard to imaging and clinical evaluation, at the final follow-up, there were significant differences in multifidus atrophy rates (27.0% ± 6.8% vs 38.7% ± 10.9%), lumbar lordosis restoration (4.6° ± 2.5° vs 3.0° ± 1.9°), postoperative VAS for back pain (1.1 ± 0.9 vs 1.8 ± 1.2), ODI (7.7 ± 5.0 vs 12.4 ± 6.7), and patient satisfaction rates (86.5% vs 61.2%) between MMB-PLIF and CO-PLIF groups. However, there were no significant differences in segmental lordosis, intervertebral height restoration, postoperative VAS for leg pain or fusion rate between the two groups. In regards to complications, there were significant differences in the incidence of adjacent segment degeneration (3.8% vs 14.3%), intractable back pain (3.8% vs 22.4%), and residual neurological symptoms (5.8% vs 20.4%) between the two groups (P < 0.05) at the final follow-up. In addition, patients with adjacent segment degeneration and intractable back pain were observed with more significant multifidus muscle atrophy than those without these two complications (31.9% ± 1.1% vs 39.6% ± 2.1% and 30.9% ± 1.1% vs 42.8% ± 2.1%).ConclusionCompared with CO-PLIF, MMB-PLIF had advantages in relation to protection of the multifidus muscle, better maintenance of lumbar lordosis, reduced lower back pain and ODI score, fewer complications, and a higher patient satisfaction rate. Protection of the multifidus muscle in lumbar surgery is an important aspect of minimally invasive surgery.