Hee Kyung Kim1, Suraj Serai1, Diana Lindquist1, Arnold C Merrow1, Paul S Horn2,3, Dong Hoon Kim4, Brenda L Wong3. 1. 1 Department of Radiology, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, 3333 Burnet Ave, Cincinnati, OH 45229-3039. 2. 2 Department of Mathematical Sciences, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH. 3. 3 Department of Neurology, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, Cincinnati, OH. 4. 4 Department of Pharmacology, Korea University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study is to validate the use of MR spectroscopy (MRS) in measuring muscular fat and to compare it with T2 maps in differentiating boys with Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD) from healthy boys. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Forty-two boys with DMD and 31 healthy boys were evaluated with MRI with (1)H-MRS and T2 maps. Grading of muscle fat and edema on conventional images, calculation of fat fractions ([fat / fat] + water) on MRS, and calculation of T2 fat values on T2 maps of the gluteus maximus and vastus lateralis muscles were performed. Group comparisons were made. The 95% reference interval (RI) of fat fraction for the control group was applied and compared with T2 map results. RESULTS: Minimal fat on T1-weighted images was seen in 90.3% (gluteus maximus) and 71.0% (vastus lateralis) of healthy boys, versus 33.3% (gluteus maximus) and 52.4% (vastus lateralis) of boys with DMD. Muscle edema was seen in none of the healthy boys versus 52.4% (gluteus maximus) and 57.1% (vastus lateralis) of the boys with DMD. Fat fractions were higher in the DMD group (52.7%, gluteus maximus; 27.3%, vastus lateralis) than in the control group (12.8%, gluteus maximus; 13.7%, vastus lateralis) (p < 0.001). The 95% RI for gluteus maximus (38.7%) resulted in 61.9% sensitivity and 100% specificity for differentiating boys with DMD from healthy boys, whereas the value for vastus lateralis (17.8%) resulted in 76.2% sensitivity and 100% specificity; both had lower accuracy than did T2 maps (100% sensitivity and specificity). There was a positive correlation between T2 fat values and fat fractions (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: In differentiation of the two groups, T2 maps were more accurate than MRS. Fat fractions can underestimate the actual amount of fat because of coexisting muscle edema in DMD.
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study is to validate the use of MR spectroscopy (MRS) in measuring muscular fat and to compare it with T2 maps in differentiating boys with Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD) from healthy boys. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Forty-two boys with DMD and 31 healthy boys were evaluated with MRI with (1)H-MRS and T2 maps. Grading of muscle fat and edema on conventional images, calculation of fat fractions ([fat / fat] + water) on MRS, and calculation of T2 fat values on T2 maps of the gluteus maximus and vastus lateralis muscles were performed. Group comparisons were made. The 95% reference interval (RI) of fat fraction for the control group was applied and compared with T2 map results. RESULTS: Minimal fat on T1-weighted images was seen in 90.3% (gluteus maximus) and 71.0% (vastus lateralis) of healthy boys, versus 33.3% (gluteus maximus) and 52.4% (vastus lateralis) of boys with DMD. Muscle edema was seen in none of the healthy boys versus 52.4% (gluteus maximus) and 57.1% (vastus lateralis) of the boys with DMD. Fat fractions were higher in the DMD group (52.7%, gluteus maximus; 27.3%, vastus lateralis) than in the control group (12.8%, gluteus maximus; 13.7%, vastus lateralis) (p < 0.001). The 95% RI for gluteus maximus (38.7%) resulted in 61.9% sensitivity and 100% specificity for differentiating boys with DMD from healthy boys, whereas the value for vastus lateralis (17.8%) resulted in 76.2% sensitivity and 100% specificity; both had lower accuracy than did T2 maps (100% sensitivity and specificity). There was a positive correlation between T2 fat values and fat fractions (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: In differentiation of the two groups, T2 maps were more accurate than MRS. Fat fractions can underestimate the actual amount of fat because of coexisting muscle edema in DMD.
Authors: Vivek Kalia; Doris G Leung; Darryl B Sneag; Filippo Del Grande; John A Carrino Journal: Semin Musculoskelet Radiol Date: 2017-08-03 Impact factor: 1.777
Authors: Pierre G Carlier; Benjamin Marty; Olivier Scheidegger; Paulo Loureiro de Sousa; Pierre-Yves Baudin; Eduard Snezhko; Dmitry Vlodavets Journal: J Neuromuscul Dis Date: 2016-03-03
Authors: Sean M Lang; Tarek Alsaied; Philip R Khoury; Thomas D Ryan; Michael D Taylor Journal: Int J Cardiovasc Imaging Date: 2020-09-20 Impact factor: 2.357
Authors: William D Rooney; Yosef A Berlow; William T Triplett; Sean C Forbes; Rebecca J Willcocks; Dah-Jyuu Wang; Ishu Arpan; Harneet Arora; Claudia Senesac; Donovan J Lott; Gihan Tennekoon; Richard Finkel; Barry S Russman; Erika L Finanger; Saptarshi Chakraborty; Elliott O'Brien; Brendan Moloney; Alison Barnard; H Lee Sweeney; Michael J Daniels; Glenn A Walter; Krista Vandenborne Journal: Neurology Date: 2020-03-17 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Alison M Barnard; Rebecca J Willcocks; William T Triplett; Sean C Forbes; Michael J Daniels; Saptarshi Chakraborty; Donovan J Lott; Claudia R Senesac; Erika L Finanger; Ann T Harrington; Gihan Tennekoon; Harneet Arora; Dah-Jyuu Wang; H Lee Sweeney; William D Rooney; Glenn A Walter; Krista Vandenborne Journal: Neurology Date: 2020-02-05 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Chia-Ying Liu; Jianhua Yao; William C Kovacs; Joseph A Shrader; Galen Joe; Ronald Ouwerkerk; Ami K Mankodi; William A Gahl; Ronald M Summers; Nuria Carrillo Journal: Neurology Date: 2020-11-20 Impact factor: 9.910