Postoperative Changes in Paraspinal Muscle Volume: Comparison between Paramedian Interfascial and Midline Approaches for Lumbar Fusion.
10.3346/jkms.2007.22.4.646
- Author:
Seung Jae HYUN
1
;
Young Baeg KIM
;
Yang Soo KIM
;
Seung Won PARK
;
Taek Kyun NAM
;
Hyun Jong HONG
;
Jeong Taik KWON
Author Information
1. Department of Neurosurgery , College of Medicine, Chung-Ang University, Seoul, Korea. ybkim1218@cau.ac.kr
- Publication Type:Original Article ; Comparative Study
- Keywords:
Paraspinal Muscle;
Paramedian Approach;
Muscle Atrophy;
Lumbar Spine
- MeSH:
Adult;
Aged;
*Bone Screws;
Female;
Humans;
Lumbar Vertebrae/*surgery;
Male;
Middle Aged;
Muscle, Skeletal/pathology;
Muscular Atrophy/etiology/pathology;
Postoperative Complications/etiology/pathology;
Reproducibility of Results;
Retrospective Studies;
Spinal Fusion/adverse effects/instrumentation/*methods;
Tomography, X-Ray Computed
- From:Journal of Korean Medical Science
2007;22(4):646-651
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:English
-
Abstract:
In this study, we compared the paramedian interfascial approach (PIA) and the traditional midline approach (MA) for lumbar fusion to determine which approach resulted in the least amount of postoperative back muscle atrophy. We performed unilateral transforaminal posterior lumbar interbody fusion via MA on the symptomatic side and pedicle screw fixation via PIA on the other side in the same patient. We evaluated the damage to the paraspinal muscle after MA and PIA by measuring the preoperative and postoperative paraspinal muscle volume in 26 patients. The preoperative and postoperative cross-sectional area, thickness, and width of the multifidus muscle were measured by computed tomography. The degree of postoperative paraspinal muscle atrophy was significantly greater on the MA side than on the contralateral PIA side (-20.7% and -4.8%, respectively, p<0.01). In conclusion, the PIA for lumbar fusion yielded successful outcomes for the preservation of paraspinal muscle in these 26 patients. We suggest that the success of PIA is due to less manipulation and retraction of the paraspinal muscle and further studies on this technique may help confirm whether less muscle injury has positive effects on the long-term clinical outcome.
