Radiological Comparison of Bilateral Paravertebral Muscles in Adolescent Idiopathic Scoliosis and Its Potential Importance

邱勇,吴亮,王斌,俞扬,朱泽章,钱邦平,马薇薇
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3760/j.issn:0253-2352.2006.04.003
2006-01-01
Abstract:Objective To study the radiological change of bilateral paravertebral muscles in adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) and analyze its potential importance. Methods AIS group had 39 cases with average age of (14.0±1.1) years and average Cobb angle of 55.8°±16.7°(range, 40°-108°), including 18 cases with Cobb angle50° and 21 cases with Cobb angle≤50°. The apical vertebrae were from T6 to T11. Congenital scoliosis(CS) group covered 25 cases with average age of (13.6±1.6) years and average Cobb angle of 78.9°±32.1°(range, 40°-155°). The apical vertebrae were from T5 to T12. Control group had 12 patients without scoliosis, 4 males and 8 females, with an average age of (23.2±5.8) years. The cross sectional area and signal intensity of paravertebral muscles in apical vertebral region on Balance sequences in AIS and CS groups and in non-diseased region in control group were analyzed on MRI. Results The cross sectional area of the paravertebral muscles on convex side was larger than that on concave side, but the signal intensity on Balance sequences of the paravertebral muscles on convex side was lower than that on concave side in AIS and CS groups(P 0.05). But there was no statistical significant difference in control group in terms of the cross sectional area and the signal intensity(P 0.05). In AIS group, the ratio of cross sectional area and signal intensity on Balance sequences of paravertebral muscle on concave side compared with convex side were 0.90±0.15 and 1.12±0.12 respectively in cases with Cobb angle50°, 0.87±0.13 and 1.09±0.09 respectively in cases with Cobb angle≤50°. No statistical significant difference was found between them(P 0.05). Conclusion There exist radiological changes in paravertebral muscles in AIS, which may be secondary to AIS and have potential clinical importance on the evaluation of curve progression.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?