EBQ:Twin Spine Study: Difference between revisions
Line 29: | Line 29: | ||
==Outcomes/Results== | ==Outcomes/Results== | ||
===Primary Outcomes=== | ===Primary Outcomes=== | ||
* T12โL4 region: 61% of the variance in disc degeneration was explained by familial aggregation, beyond that of age and occupational physical loading that together explained 16%. | |||
* L4โS1 discs: 11% of disc degeneration was explained by physical loading and age, which rose to 43% once familial aggregation was added to the model. In contrast to the upper lumbar levels, 57% remained unexplained in the lower lumbar region | |||
[[File:determinants of disc degeneration.PNG|400px|The variability (adj. R2) in qualitative disc degeneration summary scores explained by physical loading, age, and familial aggregation (proxy of heredity) demonstrated that significantly more variability remained unexplained in the L4โS1 disc levels.]] | [[File:determinants of disc degeneration.PNG|400px|The variability (adj. R2) in qualitative disc degeneration summary scores explained by physical loading, age, and familial aggregation (proxy of heredity) demonstrated that significantly more variability remained unexplained in the L4โS1 disc levels.]] | ||
Revision as of 07:31, 24 June 2020
PubMed PDF
Clinical Question
What is the contribution of genetics to disc degeneration?
Conclusion
There is a substantial influence of heredity on lumbar disc degeneration. There is little effect on disc degeneration from occupational and leisure-time physical loading, and increased loading may have a small benefit. There is only a small effect from smoking. Body weight and muscle strength have modest effects on disc degeneration. Some candidate genes were identified.
Design
The Twin Spine Study, which started in 1991, is a multidisciplinary, multinational research project with collaborators primarily in Canada, Finland, and the United States. They investigated occupational exposures, driving and whole-body vibration exposure, smoking exposure, anthropomorphic factors, heritability, and the identification of genotypes associated with disc degeneration.
Population Studied
Inclusion Criteria
Exclusion Criteria
Baseline Characteristics
Interventions
Outcomes/Results
Primary Outcomes
- T12โL4 region: 61% of the variance in disc degeneration was explained by familial aggregation, beyond that of age and occupational physical loading that together explained 16%.
- L4โS1 discs: 11% of disc degeneration was explained by physical loading and age, which rose to 43% once familial aggregation was added to the model. In contrast to the upper lumbar levels, 57% remained unexplained in the lower lumbar region