AIM: To compare magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) with clinical examination for the detection of muscle abnormality in patients with muscular dystrophy. METHODS: Muscle power in 20 patients with a variety of forms of muscular dystrophy was examined clinically using the Medical Research Council (MRC) grading scale, and patients were subsequently imaged with MRI. MRI and clinical examination for the detection of muscle normality and abnormality were compared using a McNemar chi-squared test to examine differences between the two methods. RESULTS: MRI demonstrated radiological evidence of muscle abnormality more often than clinical examination; 50% of movements assessed as normal on clinical examination were associated with muscle abnormalities on MRI, including a significant proportion where there was severe radiological abnormality, indicating that focally advanced disease may be undetectable clinically. CONCLUSION: The combination of clinical examination and MRI could improve the accuracy of phenotypic characterization of patients with muscular dystrophy, and this in turn could allow a more focussed molecular analysis through muscle biopsy or genetic investigation. This may also be very helpful in the assessment of the degree of muscle compromise not only in the early phases of the disease but especially during follow-up and can be used in therapeutic trials.
AIM: To compare magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) with clinical examination for the detection of muscle abnormality in patients with muscular dystrophy. METHODS: Muscle power in 20 patients with a variety of forms of muscular dystrophy was examined clinically using the Medical Research Council (MRC) grading scale, and patients were subsequently imaged with MRI. MRI and clinical examination for the detection of muscle normality and abnormality were compared using a McNemar chi-squared test to examine differences between the two methods. RESULTS: MRI demonstrated radiological evidence of muscle abnormality more often than clinical examination; 50% of movements assessed as normal on clinical examination were associated with muscle abnormalities on MRI, including a significant proportion where there was severe radiological abnormality, indicating that focally advanced disease may be undetectable clinically. CONCLUSION: The combination of clinical examination and MRI could improve the accuracy of phenotypic characterization of patients with muscular dystrophy, and this in turn could allow a more focussed molecular analysis through muscle biopsy or genetic investigation. This may also be very helpful in the assessment of the degree of muscle compromise not only in the early phases of the disease but especially during follow-up and can be used in therapeutic trials.
Authors: R Stramare; V Beltrame; R Dal Borgo; L Gallimberti; A C Frigo; E Pegoraro; C Angelini; L Rubaltelli; G P Feltrin Journal: Radiol Med Date: 2010-02-22 Impact factor: 3.469
Authors: Martin Torriani; Elise Townsend; Bijoy J Thomas; Miriam A Bredella; Reza H Ghomi; Brian S Tseng Journal: Skeletal Radiol Date: 2011-07-29 Impact factor: 2.199
Authors: Erika L Finanger; Barry Russman; Sean C Forbes; William D Rooney; Glenn A Walter; Krista Vandenborne Journal: Phys Med Rehabil Clin N Am Date: 2011-12-14 Impact factor: 1.784
Authors: Laís Uyeda Aivazoglou; Julio Brandão Guimarães; Thomas M Link; Maria Alice Freitas Costa; Fabiano Nassar Cardoso; Bruno de Mattos Lombardi Badia; Igor Braga Farias; Wladimir Bocca Vieira de Rezende Pinto; Paulo Victor Sgobbi de Souza; Acary Souza Bulle Oliveira; Alzira Alves de Siqueira Carvalho; André Yui Aihara; Artur da Rocha Corrêa Fernandes Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2021-04-21 Impact factor: 5.315