ArticleEuropean radiology experimental2026
Reduced lumbar myofascial mobility in chronic low back pain quantified using MR elastography-based slip interface imaging.
Article in European radiology experimental, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesRestricted sliding at lumbar myofascial interfaces may contribute to chronic low back pain with myofascial pain features (CLBP-MP). We aimed to evaluate magnetic resonance elastography (MRE)-based slip interface imaging (SII) to quantify lumbar intermuscular myofascial mobility in healthy volunteers (HV), assessing repeatability, and comparing CLBP-MP patients with matched HV. MATERIALS AND
methodsMRE/SII was performed in 20 CLBP-MP patients and 41 HV. SII-derived maximal normalized displacement discontinuity (Dnorm) was analyzed at the quadratus lumborum-erector spinae (QL-ES) and ES-multifidus (ES-M) interfaces at L3-L4, computing mobility indices. Repeatability was assessed via within-subject coefficient of variation (wCV) and Bland-Altman analysis. In HV, associations with age/sex/body mass index (BMI) were tested. Group differences were evaluated by comparing patients with matched HV and by stratifying patients by "pain, enjoyment, and general activity" (PEG) score using one-way ANOVA. Associations with PEG were evaluated using Pearson correlation.
resultsRepeatability was excellent (mean wCV < 10% for within- and between-day). In HV, myofascial mobility differed by anatomic interface and vertebral level but showed no association with age, sex, or BMI. At L4 ES-M, mobility showed a significant group effect (F(2,37) = 13.23, p < 0.001), with lower mobility in moderate-to-severe versus mild pain (q = 0.023) and versus HV (q < 0.001), and correlated negatively with PEG (r = -0.51, p = 0.021).
conclusionPain-related reductions in localized lumbar intermuscular myofascial mobility in CLBP-MP were shown. MRE-based SII is a repeatable quantitative technique, supporting its potential as an early-stage biomarker for characterizing lumbar myofascial mobility and guiding multicenter studies. KEY POINTS: Question Lumbar myofascial interface sliding is essential for normal movement, but objective quantification of sliding dysfunction in chronic low back pain remains limited. Findings SII showed high repeatability and reduced L4 erector spinae-multifidus mobility associated with greater pain severity in chronic low back pain patients. Relevance statement MR elastography-based SII offers repeatable, noninvasive measurement of lumbar myofascial mobility and shows pain-related localized restriction in chronic low back pain with myofascial features, supporting objective characterization of inter-muscular myofascial mechanics and exploratory biomarker development.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42821152What 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.