| Title |
Lumbar paraspinal muscle fat infiltration is independently associated with sex, age, and inter-vertebral disc degeneration in symptomatic patients
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Skeletal Radiology, January 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00256-018-2880-1 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Julio Urrutia, Pablo Besa, Daniel Lobos, Mauricio Campos, Cristobal Arrieta, Marcelo Andia, Sergio Uribe |
| Abstract |
To determine the association of paraspinal muscles and psoas relative cross-sectional area (RCSA) and fat signal fraction (FSF) with sex, age, and intervertebral disc degeneration (IDD) in symptomatic patients. We retrospectively evaluated 80 adult patients with spinal symptoms using T2-weighted magnetic resonance images. We determined RCSA and FSF of the paraspinal muscles (erector spinae and multifidus) and psoas from L1-L2 to L5-S1; we determined IDD using the Pfirrmann classification. We compared differences in muscle RCSA and FSF based on sex and IDD, and we correlated age and IDD with RCSA and FSF. Using multivariate linear regression analyses, we determined the impact of sex, age, and IDD on RCSA and FSF. Men exhibited larger psoas RCSA but not larger paraspinal muscles RCSA than women. Women had larger FSF in the paraspinal muscles and psoas. Increasing IDD was associated with larger FSF if ≥2 Pfirrmann grades were observed. IDD correlated with FSF of the paraspinal muscles, and age correlated with FSF of the paraspinal muscles and psoas. IDD was less consistently correlated with RCSA, but age correlated negatively with RCSA of all three muscles. Linear regression analyses demonstrated that sex, age, and IDD were each independently associated with FSF of the paraspinal muscles; additionally, sex and age, but not IDD, were associated with psoas FSF. RCSA was less consistently influenced by these three variables. Sex, age, and IDD are independently associated with paraspinal muscles FSF; only sex and age influence psoas FSF. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 50% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 55 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 55 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 9 | 16% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 7 | 13% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 5 | 9% |
| Researcher | 5 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 11 | 20% |
| Unknown | 15 | 27% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 15 | 27% |
| Engineering | 7 | 13% |
| Neuroscience | 4 | 7% |
| Unspecified | 3 | 5% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 7 | 13% |
| Unknown | 16 | 29% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 28 June 2018.
All research outputs
#15,678,105
of 23,298,349 outputs
Outputs from Skeletal Radiology
#954
of 1,490 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#272,079
of 443,101 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Skeletal Radiology
#37
of 70 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,298,349 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,490 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.3. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 443,101 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 70 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.