| Literature DB >> 26181385 |
Emilie Lareau-Trudel1, Arnaud Le Troter2, Badih Ghattas3, Jean Pouget1, Shahram Attarian1, David Bendahan2, Emmanuelle Salort-Campana1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Facioscapulohumeral muscular dystrophy type 1 (FSHD1) is the third most common inherited muscular dystrophy. Considering the highly variable clinical expression and the slow disease progression, sensitive outcome measures would be of interest. METHODS ANDEntities:
Mesh:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26181385 PMCID: PMC4504465 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0132717
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Fig 1Steps of the automated segmentation algorithm.
Fig 2Mean visual scores for the fatty infiltration in each muscle of the lower limb.
a: Thigh muscles for the whole group of patients, b: thigh muscles for T1 sub group, c: thigh muscles for T2 sub group, d: thigh muscles for T3 sub group, e: leg muscles for the whole group of patients, f: leg muscles for L1 sub group, g: leg muscles for L2 sub group, h: the leg muscles for L3 sub group. Legs: GL = Gastrocnemius lateralis, GM = Gastrocnemius medialis, P = Peroneus, S = Soleus, TA = Tibialis anterior, TP = Tibialis posterior. Thighs: ADD = Adductors; BF = Biceps Femoris; G = Gracilis; R = Rectus Femoris, S = Sartorius, SMM = Semimembranosus, SMT = Semitendinosus, VI = Vastus intermediaris, VL = Vastus lateralis, VM = Vastus medialis.
Fig 3T1 weighted MRI images of thighs and legs from 3 FSHD1 patients illustrating three different patterns of muscular involvement.
(a): a normal appearing imaging pattern, (b): a selective muscle involvement pattern; (c): global fatty infiltration pattern with selective muscle sparing
Fig 4Fat fraction (%) in FSHD1 patients and healthy volunteers.
***: p<0.001.
ICC and variation coefficients (VC) for between and within observers manual measurements of muscle and fat fractions.
|
|
| |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ICC | CV (%) | ICC | CV (%) | |
|
| .97 | 3.3 ± 4.7 | .98 | 5.6 ± 4.6 |
|
| .97 | 3.2 ± 4 | .98 | 4.8 ±2.9 |
Fig 5Examples of MR images.
Examples of a successful automated segmentation in a control subject (a) and two patients (b and c). Examples of MR images with manual correction of the segmentation process (d).
Fig 6Correlation of intramuscular fat fraction with mean visual score of muscular fatty infiltration.
A: Correlation between the mean visual score of the thighs and the intramuscular fat fraction. B: Correlation between the mean visual score of the thighs and the Log of the intramuscular fat fraction.