| Literature DB >> 27973387 |
A Saito1, K Okada, I Saito, K Kinoshita, A Seto, Y Takahashi, K Shibata, H Sato, M Wakasa.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To clarify the functional status of the articularis genus muscle (AGM) in individuals with knee osteoarthritis (OA) and to analyze the muscle's relationship with knee OA.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27973387 PMCID: PMC5259576
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Musculoskelet Neuronal Interact ISSN: 1108-7161 Impact factor: 2.041
Figure 1Positioning of the participants during isometric knee extension.
Figure 2Long-axis image of the AGM (arrowheads). The AGM was identified as the thin muscle located on the prefemoral fat pad inserting into the inferior aspect of the suprapatellar bursa (arrows). F: Femur, PFP: Prefemoral fat pad.
Figure 3A, B. Analysis of the AGM. A. Long-axis image at rest. B. Long-axis image during isometric contraction. (a) or (a’) showed muscle thickness of the AGM. Increased muscle thickness during isometric contraction was expressed as a percentage of the thickness at rest (%Muscle-Increase = (a’ – a) / a). (b) or (b’) showed the anteroposterior distance of the suprapatellar bursa. The increased anteroposterior distance during contraction was expressed as a percentage of the distance at rest (%Bursa-Increase = (b’ – b) / b). The moving distance of the muscle insertion (c) was measured as the distance between points at rest (○) and during isometric contraction (☆).
Comparison of the functional status of the articularis genus muscle in each group.
| Variables | OA Group | Elderly Group | Young Group |
|---|---|---|---|
| Muscle thickness | |||
| - Rest (mm) | 1.91 ± 0.16[ | 2.02 ± 0.11[ | 2.38 ± 0.20 |
| - %Muscle-Increase (%) | 37.00 ± 20.26[ | 72.42 ± 12.27[ | 92.60 ± 15.86 |
| Anteroposterior distance of the bursa | |||
| - Rest (mm) | 3.58 ± 2.07[ | 0.94 ± 0.26[ | 0.69 ± 0.18 |
| - %Bursa-Increase (%) | 61.10 ± 46.12[ | 216.89 ± 85.47[ | 411.21 ± 141.74 |
| Moving distance of the insertion (mm) | 5.25 ± 2.40[ | 9.67 ± 2.74[ | 11.16 ± 2.13 |
Values are mean ± SD.
Significantly different from the elderly group (p < 0.001).
Significantly different from the young group (p < 0.001).
Comparison of the functional status of the articularis genus muscle between the affected and non-affected knees in individuals with unilateral knee OA (N=15).
| Variables | Affected knee | Non-affected knee | P-value |
|---|---|---|---|
| Muscle thickness | |||
| - Rest (mm) | 1.99 ± 0.10 | 2.11 ± 0.15 | < 0.001 |
| - %Muscle-Increase (%) | 49.55 ± 18.75 | 74.20 ± 12.21 | < 0.001 |
| Anteroposterior distance of the bursa | |||
| - Rest (mm) | 2.98 ± 1.92 | 0.98 ± 0.43 | < 0.001 |
| - %Bursa-Increase (%) | 68.70 ± 31.45 | 222.02 ± 71.80 | < 0.001 |
| Moving distance of the insertion (mm) | 6.20 ± 1.85 | 9.06 ± 2.00 | < 0.001 |
Values are mean ± SD.
Correlations between functional status of the muscle and symptoms in the OA group.
| Variables | Extension ROM (°) | Flexion ROM (°) | VAS pain (mm) | KL grade |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Muscle thickness | ||||
| - Rest (mm) | 0.464[ | 0.019 | -0.356[ | -0.169 |
| - %Muscle-Increase (%) | 0.643[ | 0.269 | -0.509[ | -0.535[ |
| Anteroposterior distance of the bursa | ||||
| - Rest (mm) | -0.520[ | -0.391[ | 0.236 | 0.325[ |
| - %Bursa-Increase (%) | 0.532[ | 0.249 | -0.351[ | -0.489[ |
| Moving distance of the insertion (mm) | 0.838[ | 0.458[ | -0.557[ | -0.592[ |
ROM, VAS pain: Pearson correlation coefficient. KL grade: Spearman rank correlation coefficient.
p < 0.05,
p < 0.01.