OBJECTIVE: To describe the clinical and electrophysiologic features of patients with inclusion body myositis that was misinterpreted as motor neuron disease. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively retrieved the medical records of 70 patients with a pathologic diagnosis of inclusion body myositis. From this group, we selected those who had been first diagnosed as having motor neuron disease or amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. We reviewed the clinical, electrophysiologic, laboratory, and morphologic studies. RESULTS: Nine (13%) of 70 patients with inclusion body myositis had been diagnosed as having motor neuron disease. Six of the 9 patients had asymmetric weakness; in 4 the distal arm muscles were affected. Eight patients had finger flexor weakness. Tendon reflexes were preserved in weak limbs in 6, hyperactive in 2, and absent in 1. Four patients had dysphagia. Fasciculation was seen in 2 patients. None had definite upper motor neuron signs or muscle cramps. Routine electromyographic studies showed fibrillation potentials and positive sharp waves in all 9. Fasciculation potentials were seen in 7 and long-duration polyphasic motor unit potentials were seen in 8. There was no evidence of a myogenic disorder in these 9 patients. Muscle biopsy was done because of slow progression or prominent weakness of the finger flexors and was diagnostic of inclusion body myositis. A quantitative electromyogram was myopathic in 4 of the 5 patients studied. CONCLUSIONS: Inclusion body myositis may mimic motor neuron disease. Muscle biopsy and quantitative electromyographic analysis are indicated in patients with atypical motor neuron disease, especially those with slow progression or early and disproportionate weakness of the finger flexors.
OBJECTIVE: To describe the clinical and electrophysiologic features of patients with inclusion body myositis that was misinterpreted as motor neuron disease. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively retrieved the medical records of 70 patients with a pathologic diagnosis of inclusion body myositis. From this group, we selected those who had been first diagnosed as having motor neuron disease or amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. We reviewed the clinical, electrophysiologic, laboratory, and morphologic studies. RESULTS: Nine (13%) of 70 patients with inclusion body myositis had been diagnosed as having motor neuron disease. Six of the 9 patients had asymmetric weakness; in 4 the distal arm muscles were affected. Eight patients had finger flexor weakness. Tendon reflexes were preserved in weak limbs in 6, hyperactive in 2, and absent in 1. Four patients had dysphagia. Fasciculation was seen in 2 patients. None had definite upper motor neuron signs or muscle cramps. Routine electromyographic studies showed fibrillation potentials and positive sharp waves in all 9. Fasciculation potentials were seen in 7 and long-duration polyphasic motor unit potentials were seen in 8. There was no evidence of a myogenic disorder in these 9 patients. Muscle biopsy was done because of slow progression or prominent weakness of the finger flexors and was diagnostic of inclusion body myositis. A quantitative electromyogram was myopathic in 4 of the 5 patients studied. CONCLUSIONS: Inclusion body myositis may mimic motor neuron disease. Muscle biopsy and quantitative electromyographic analysis are indicated in patients with atypical motor neuron disease, especially those with slow progression or early and disproportionate weakness of the finger flexors.
Authors: Phillip C Mongiovi; Bakri Elsheikh; Victoria H Lawson; John T Kissel; W David Arnold Journal: Muscle Nerve Date: 2014-09-24 Impact factor: 3.217
Authors: Qiang Gang; Conceição Bettencourt; Pedro M Machado; Stefen Brady; Janice L Holton; Alan M Pittman; Deborah Hughes; Estelle Healy; Matthew Parton; David Hilton-Jones; Perry B Shieh; Merrilee Needham; Christina Liang; Edmar Zanoteli; Leonardo Valente de Camargo; Boel De Paepe; Jan De Bleecker; Aziz Shaibani; Michela Ripolone; Raffaella Violano; Maurizio Moggio; Richard J Barohn; Mazen M Dimachkie; Marina Mora; Renato Mantegazza; Simona Zanotti; Andrew B Singleton; Michael G Hanna; Henry Houlden Journal: Neurobiol Aging Date: 2016-08-08 Impact factor: 4.673
Authors: Leonardo Valente de Camargo; Mary Souza de Carvalho; Samuel Katsuyuki Shinjo; Acary Souza Bulle de Oliveira; Edmar Zanoteli Journal: Biomed Res Int Date: 2018-01-29 Impact factor: 3.411
Authors: Jason King; Richard A LeCouteur; Monica Aleman; D Colette Williams; Peter F Moore; Ling T Guo; Andrew P Mizisin; G Diane Shelton Journal: Acta Neuropathol Date: 2009-08-29 Impact factor: 17.088