Advertisement

Acta Neurochirurgica

, Volume 161, Issue 10, pp 2201–2209 | Cite as

Deep flexor sarcopenia as a predictor of poor functional outcome after anterior cervical discectomy in patients with myelopathy

  • Sumit ThakarEmail author
  • Aditya Atal Arun
  • Saritha Aryan
  • Dilip Mohan
  • Alangar S Hegde
Original Article - Spine degenerative
  • 48 Downloads
Part of the following topical collections:
  1. Spine degenerative

Abstract

Background

Paraspinal muscle morphometry has been recognized to be a prognostic factor across various surgical conditions, but its utility in predicting disease-specific outcomes in spine surgery remains under-explored.

Methods

A prospective cohort study was performed on 45 consecutive patients undergoing anterior cervical discectomy (ACD) for single-level, symptomatic cervical degenerative disc disease causing radiculomyelopathy or myelopathy. Previously described predictors of outcome such as age, gender, smoking, comorbidities, duration of symptoms, preoperative Nurick grade, extent of cord compression, and signal intensity change in the cord were recorded. Additionally, MRI-based morphometrics of the superficial and deep paraspinal muscles were recorded. Logistic regression (LR) analysis was performed using a purposeful variable selection process to identify variables that independently predicted Nurick grade improvement (NGI).

Results

At a mean follow-up of 20.02 ± 8.63 months after ACD, 37 (82.22%) patients demonstrated NGI. LR analysis yielded three predictors of NGI of which two were related to the deep flexor muscles. While a worse preoperative Nurick grade negatively predicted NGI, a deep flexor area and deep flexor/deep extensor area ratio positively predicted NGI. The regression model demonstrated a good fit and was statistically significant (χ2(3) = 22.18, p < 0.0001). The model explained 64% of the variance in NGI and correctly classified 89% of cases.

Conclusions

This study has for the first time identified the utility of paraspinal morphometrics in predicting disease-specific functional outcome after cervical spine surgery. Our results indicate that in addition to preoperative Nurick grade, an already accepted outcome predictor, the deep flexor cross-sectional area, and the deep flexor/deep extensor ratio are strong predictors of NGI following ACD for single-level, symptomatic cervical degenerative disc disease with myelopathy. Deep muscle morphometrics could be included in future risk stratification algorithms for patients with cervical disc disease.

Keywords

Paraspinal muscles Deep flexors Predictor Functional outcome Anterior cervical discectomy 

Abbreviations

ACD

Anterior cervical discectomy

ACDF

Anterior cervical discectomy with fusion

ACDA

Anterior cervical discectomy with arthroplasty

CSA

Cross-sectional area

CT

Computed tomography

DE

Deep extensor

DF

Deep flexor

LR

Logistic regression

MRI

Magnetic resonance imaging

NGI

Nurick grade improvement

OPLL

Ossified posterior longitudinal ligament

PSM

Paraspinal muscles

ROI

Region of interest

SE

Superficial extensor

SF

Superficial flexor

VBA

Vertebral body area

Notes

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Supplementary material

701_2019_3972_MOESM1_ESM.docx (17 kb)
ESM 1 (DOCX 17 kb)

References

  1. 1.
    Andersen T, Christensen FB, Laursen M, Høy K, Hansen ES, Bünger C (2001) Smoking as a predictor of negative outcome in lumbar spinal fusion. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 26:2623–2628CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bertalanffy H, Eggert HR (1988) Clinical long-term results of anterior discectomy without fusion for treatment of cervical radiculopathy and myelopathy. A follow-up of 164 cases. Acta Neurochir 90:127–135CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Block AR, Ohnmeiss DD, Guyer RD, Rashbaum RF, Hochschuler SH (2001) The use of presurgical psychological screening to predict the outcome of spine surgery. Spine J 1:274–282CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bokshan SL, Han AL, DePasse JM, Eltorai AE, Marcaccio SE, Palumbo MA, Daniels AH (2016) Effect of sarcopenia on postoperative morbidity and mortality after thoracolumbar spine surgery. Orthopedics 39:e1159–e1164CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Brown NA, Zenilman ME (2010) The impact of frailty in the elderly on the outcome of surgery in the aged. Adv Surg 44:229–249CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bursac Z, Gauss CH, Williams DK, Hosmer DW (2008) Purposeful selection of variables in logistic regression. Source Code for Biology and Medicine 3:17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Chiles BW 3rd, Leonard MA, Choudhri HF, Cooper PR (1999) Cervical spondylotic myelopathy: patterns of neurological deficit and recovery after anterior cervical decompression. Neurosurgery 44:762–769CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Cruz-Jentoft AJ, Baeyens JP, Bauer JM, Boirie Y, Cederholm T, Landi F, Martin FC, Michel JP, Rolland Y, Schneider SM, Topinková E, Vandewoude M, Zamboni M (2010) Sarcopenia: European consensus on definition and diagnosis: report of the European Working Group on Sarcopenia in Older People. Age Ageing 39:412–423CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Elliott JM, Jull GA, Noteboom JT, Durbridge GL, Gibbon WW (2007) Magnetic resonance imaging study of cross-sectional area of the cervical extensor musculature in an asymptomatic cohort. Clin Anat 20:35–40CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Elliott JM, O'Leary S, Sterling M, Hendrikz J, Pedler A, Jull G (2010) Magnetic resonance imaging findings of fatty infiltrate in the cervical flexors in chronic whiplash. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 35:948–954CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Falla DL, Jull GA, Hodges PW (2004) Patients with neck pain demonstrate reduced electromyographic activity of the deep cervical flexor muscles during performance of the craniocervical flexion test. Spine 29:2108–2114CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Fehlings MG, Tetreault LA, Riew KD, Middleton JW, Aarabi B, Arnold PM, Brodke DS, Burns AS, Carette S, Chen R, Chiba K, Dettori JR, Furlan JC, Harrop JS, Holly LT, Kalsi-Ryan S, Kotter M, Kwon BK, Martin AR, Milligan J, Nakashima H, Nagoshi N, Rhee J, Singh A, Skelly AC, Sodhi S, Wilson JR, Yee A, Wang JC (2017) A clinical practice guideline for the management of patients with degenerative cervical myelopathy: recommendations for patients with mild, moderate, and severe disease and nonmyelopathic patients with evidence of cord compression. Global Spine J 7:70S–83SCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Gakhar H, Dhillon A, Blackwell J, Hussain K, Bommireddy R, Klezl Z, Williams J (2015) Study investigating the role of skeletal muscle mass estimation in metastatic spinal cord compression. Eur Spine J 24:2150–2155CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hägg O, Fritzell P, Ekselius L, Nordwall A (2003) Study SLS: predictors of outcome in fusion surgery for chronic low back pain. A report from the Swedish Lumbar Spine Study. Eur Spine J 12:22–33Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Jeong SY, Eun JP, Oh YM (2015) Magnetic resonance imaging analysis of deep cervical flexors in patients with ossification of the posterior longitudinal ligament and clinical implication. Am J Phys Med Rehabil 94:967–974CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Jesus-Moraleida FR, Ferreira PH, Pereira LS, Vasconcelos CM, Ferreira ML (2011) Ultrasonographic analysis of the neck flexor muscles in patients with chronic neck pain and changes after cervical spine mobilization. J Manip Physiol Ther 34:514–524CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Jull G, Kristjansson E, Dall'Alba P (2004) Impairment in the cervical flexors: a comparison of whiplash and insidious onset neck pain patients. Man Ther 9:89–94CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Jull GA, O'Leary SP, Falla DL (2008) Clinical assessment of the deep cervical flexor muscles: the craniocervical flexion test. J Manip Physiol Ther 31:525–533CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Karadimas SK, Erwin WM, Ely CG, Dettori JR, Fehlings MG (2013) Pathophysiology and natural history of cervical spondylotic myelopathy. Spine 38:S21–S36CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Khan AB, Weiss EH, Khan AW, Omeis I, Verla T (2017) Back muscle morphometry: effects on outcomes of spine surgery. World Neurosurg 103:174–179CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Koshimizu H, Sakai Y, Harada A, Ito S, Ito K, Hida T (2018) The impact of sarcopenia on cervical spine sagittal alignment after cervical laminoplasty. Clin Spine Surg 31:E342–E346CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Kristjansson E, Treleaven J (2009) Sensorimotor function and dizziness in neck pain implications for assessment and management. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 39:364–377CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Moussa AH, Nitta M, Symon L (1983) The results of anterior cervical fusion in cervical spondylosis. Review of 125 cases. Acta Neurochir 68:277–288CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Makary MA, Segev DL, Pronovost PJ, Syin D, Bandeen-Roche K, Patel P, Takenaga R, Devgan L, Holzmueller CG, Tian J, Fried LP (2010) Frailty as a predictor of surgical outcomes in older patients. J Am Coll Surg 210:901–908CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Moisey LL, Mourtzakis M, Cotton BA, Premji T, Heyland DK, Wade CE, Bulger E, Kozar RA (2013) Skeletal muscle predicts ventilator-free days, ICU-free days, and mortality in elderly ICU patients. Crit Care 17:R206CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Moskven E, Bourassa-Moreau É, Charest-Morin R, Flexman A, Street J (2018) The impact of frailty and sarcopenia on postoperative outcomes in adult spine surgery. A systematic review of the literature. Spine J 18:2354–2369CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Nielsen PR, Jørgensen LD, Dahl B, Pedersen T, Tønnesen H (2010) Prehabilitation and early rehabilitation after spinal surgery: randomized clinical trial. Clin Rehabil 24:137–148CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    O’Leary S, Jull G, Kim M, Vicenzino B (2007) Cranio-cervical flexor muscle impairment at maximal, moderate, and low loads is a feature of neck pain. Man Ther 12:34–39CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Partridge JS, Harari D, Dhesi JK (2012) Frailty in the older surgical patient: a review. Age Ageing 41:142–147CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Peolsson A, Hedlund R, Vavruch L, Oberg B (2003) Predictive factors for the outcome of anterior cervical decompression and fusion. Eur Spine J 12:274–280Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Sheetz KH, Waits SA, Terjimanian MN, Sullivan J, Campbell DA, Wang SC, Englesbe MJ (2013) Cost of major surgery in the sarcopenic patient. J Am Coll Surg 217:813–818CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Shimomura T, Sumi M, Nishida K, Maeno K, Tadokoro K, Miyamoto H, Kurosaka M, Doita M (2007) Prognostic factors for deterioration of patients with cervical spondylotic myelopathy after nonsurgical treatment. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 49:2474–2479CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Tetreault LA, Côté P, Kopjar B, Arnold P, Fehlings MG (2015) AOSpine North America and International Clinical Trial Research Network: a clinical prediction model to assess surgical outcome in patients with cervical spondylotic myelopathy: internal and external validations using the prospective multicenter AOSpine North American and international datasets of 743 patients. Spine J 15:388–397CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Tetreault LA, Dettori JR, Wilson JR, Singh A, Nouri A, Fehlings MG, Brodt ED, Jacobs WB (2013) Systematic review of magnetic resonance imaging characteristics that affect treatment decision making and predict clinical outcome in patients with cervical spondylotic myelopathy. Spine 38:S89–S110CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Tetreault LA, Karpova A, Fehlings MG (2015) Predictors of outcome in patients with degenerative cervical spondylotic myelopathy undergoing surgical treatment: results of a systematic review. Eur Spine J 24:236–251CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Tetreault LA, Kopjar B, Vaccaro A, Yoon ST, Arnold PM, Massicotte EM (2013) A clinical prediction model to determine outcomes in patients with cervical spondylotic myelopathy undergoing surgical treatment: data from the prospective, multi-center AOSpine North America study. J Bone Joint Surg Am 95:1659–1666CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Thakar S, Kurudi Siddappa A, Aryan S, Mohan D, Sai Kiran NA, Hegde AS (2017) Does the mesodermal derangement in Chiari type I malformation extend to the cervical spine? Evidence from an analytical morphometric study on cervical paraspinal muscles. J Neurosurg Spine 27:421–427CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Thakar S, Mohan D, Furtado SV, Sai Kiran NA, Dadlani R, Aryan S, Rao AS, Hegde AS (2014) Paraspinal muscle morphometry in cervical spondylotic myelopathy and its implications in clinicoradiological outcomes following central corpectomy: clinical article. J Neurosurg Spine 21:223–230CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Vleggeert-Lankamp CLA, Janssen TMH, van Zwet E, Goedmakers CMW, Bosscher L, Peul W, Arts MP (2018) The NECK trial: effectiveness of anterior cervical discectomy with or without interbody fusion and arthroplasty in the treatment of cervical disc herniation; a double-blinded randomized controlled trial. Spine J 19:965–975CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Wilson JR, Tetreault LA, Kim J, Shamji MF, Harrop JS, Mroz T, Cho S, Fehlings MG (2017) State of the art in degenerative cervical myelopathy: an update on current clinical evidence. Neurosurgery 80:S33–S45CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Zakaria HM, Basheer A, Boyce-Fappiano D, Elibe E, Schultz L, Lee I, Siddiqui F, Griffith B, Chang V (2016) Application of morphometric analysis to patients with lung cancer metastasis to the spine: a clinical study. Neurosurg Focus 41:E12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Zakaria HM, Schultz L, Mossa-Basha F, Griffith B, Chang V (2015) Morphometrics as a predictor of perioperative morbidity after lumbar spine surgery. Neurosurg Focus 39:E5CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Austria, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Neurological SciencesSri Sathya Sai Institute of Higher Medical SciencesBangaloreIndia

Personalised recommendations