ArticleBMC musculoskeletal disorders2024
What are the differences in paraspinal muscle morphometry among degenerative spondylolisthesis patients, isthmic spondylolisthesis patients, and healthy individuals? A propensity score matching analysis.
Article in BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Systematic Review of Paraspinal Muscle Changes in Lumbar Spondylolisthesis: MRI and CT Insights.Orthopaedic surgery · 2026Pooled it
- Beyond the pars defect: multifidus degeneration as an independent predictor of vertebral slippage severity in isthmic lumbar L5 spondylolisthesis.European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo compare the morphometry of paraspinal muscles in patients with degenerative spondylolisthesis (DS), isthmic spondylolisthesis (IS), and healthy individuals.
methodsThirty-seven pairs of DS patients were selected using propensity score matching with IS patients, while 37 healthy individuals matched for age, sex, and BMI were selected as controls. The relative cross-sectional area (rCSA), and relative functional cross-sectional area (rfCSA) of paraspinal muscles were measured, and the degree of fatty infiltration (FI) was calculated. Based on occupational differences, the patients were also divided into worker and farmer groups, and the same measurements were taken on them.
resultsAt the L3/L4 level, the multifidus (MF) FI was greater in the DS and IS groups than in the control group, the erector spinae (ES) rfCSA was higher in the IS group than in the DS and control groups. At the L4/L5 level, MF rfCSA was smaller in the DS and IS groups than in the control group; ES rfCSA was higher in the IS group than in the DS and control groups. At the L5/S1 level, MF rfCSA was smaller in the DS and IS groups than in the control group; ES rfCSA was higher in the IS group than in the DS group. At the L3/L4, L4/L5 level, MF rfCSA were higher in the worker group than in the farmer group (p < 0.05).
conclusionThe morphological changes in paraspinal muscles in patients with DS were dominated by selective atrophy of the MF, while in patients with IS, the morphological changes in paraspinal muscle showed selective atrophy of the MF accompanied by compensatory hypertrophy of the ES. The surgeon should consider the morphological differences in paraspinal muscle between different types of lumbar spondylolisthesis when establishing the appropriate surgical program.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.