| Literature DB >> 29423575 |
Chiara Giraudo1, Stanislav Motyka2, Michael Weber2, Manuela Karner2, Christoph Resinger3, Thorsten Feiweier4, Siegfried Trattnig2,5, Wolfgang Bogner2.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To assess acute muscle tears in professional football players by diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) and evaluate the impact of normalization of data.Entities:
Keywords: Athletes; Diffusion tensor imaging; Injury; Magnetic resonance imaging; Muscle
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29423575 PMCID: PMC5986840 DOI: 10.1007/s00330-017-5218-9
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Eur Radiol ISSN: 0938-7994 Impact factor: 5.315
Fig. 1Drawing of the muscles of the thigh representing the regions of interest (ROIs) used for the ratio analysis. In this example, an injured area on the right rectus femoris muscle is represented (yellow star) where a manual ROI (red ROI in a, indicated by the yellow arrow) has been drawn (ROItear). The same ROI has been drawn on a healthy ipsilateral area (blue ROI in a; i.e., ROIhi). The same areas were then investigated on the contralateral side (red and blue ROIs in b, respectively ROIhc_t and ROIhc_i)
Demographic and clinical findings of the patients with muscle tears enrolled in the study
| Gender | 8 males | |
| Age range | 20–36 years | |
| Injured muscle | ||
| Gastrocnemius medialis | 2 | |
| Rectus femoris | 2 | |
| Semimembranosus | 1 | |
| Semitendinosus | 1 | |
| Soleus | 1 | |
| Biceps femoris | 1 | |
| Grading# | Minor partial tear | 2 |
| Moderate partial | 6 | |
| (Sub)Total rupture | / |
According to the Munich Consensus’ classification
Fig. 2Axial proton density fat-sat image showing a grade I muscle tear of the right semitendinosus muscle (blue arrow in a) of a 20-year-old professional football player. In (b) and (c), the colour-coded maps of the right and left thigh, respectively, are presented along with the corresponding fibre tracking of both semitendinosus muscles (i.e. blue dotted line in a), which do not demonstrate any difference for diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) metrics at the statistical analyses (i.e. Student’s t-tests)
Entire muscle analyses. Comparison between the injured muscle and the contralateral corresponding healthy muscle
| Entire muscle with tear (mean ± SD) | Entire contralateral healthy muscle (mean ± SD) | Student’s t-test | |
|---|---|---|---|
| trn | 8116 ± 6347 | 8794 ± 6402 | 0.396 |
| trl (mm) | 44.6 ± 19.16 | 46.74 ± 20.85 | 0.496 |
| trv (mm3) | 93,957.61 ± 57,291.74 | 108,564.36 ± 66,799.11 | 0.189 |
| FA | 0.20 ± 0.06 | 0.20 ± 0.05 | 0.858 |
| MD (10-3mm2/s) | 1.35 ± 0.10 | 1.30 ± 0.05 | 0.078 |
| AD | 1.73 ± 0.16 | 1.67 ± 0.11 |
|
| RD | 1.16 ± 0.09 | 1.11 ± 0.05 | 0.106 |
tr number of tracks, trl length of tracks, tr volume of tracks, FA fractional anisotropy, MD mean diffusivity, AD axial diffusivity, RD radial diffusivity
*Bold type indicates statistically significant values (p<0.05)
Region of interest (ROI)-based diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) analyses
| 1-Way ANOVA |
| ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ROItear | ROIhc_t | ROIhi | ROIhc_i | ROItear vs. ROIhc_t | ROItear vs. ROIhi | ROItear vs. ROIhc_i | ROIhc_t vs. ROIhi | ROIhc_t vs. ROIhc_i | ROIhi vs. ROIhc_i | ||
| trn | 972 ± 997 | 1,633 ± 1317 | 1,002 ± 669 | 893 ± 661 | 0.182 | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| trl (mm) | 37.30 ± 22 | 54.15 ± 24.83 | 48.08 ± 23.1 | 44.10 ± 23.7 |
| 0.065 | 0.596 | 1.000 | 1.000 | 0.366 | 1.000 |
| trv (mm3) | 14,530 ± 13,925 | 22,424 ± 12,960 | 14,371 ± 10,191 | 13,482 ± 11,349 | 0.102 | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| FA | 0.18 ± 0.05 | 0.20 ± 0.04 | 0.22 ± 0.05 | 0.20 ± 0.04 |
|
|
| 0.098 | 0.454 | 1.000 | 1.000 |
| MD (10-3mm2/s) | 1.44 ± 0.11 | 1.31 ± 0.07 | 1.33 ± 0.13 | 1.28 ± 0.1 |
|
| 0.084 |
| 1.000 | 1.000 | 1.000 |
| AD | 1.8 ± 0.15 | 1.7 ± 0.15 | 1.7 ± 0.18 | 1.65 ± 0.17 |
|
| 0.336 |
| 1.000 | 0.784 | 0.282 |
| RD | 1.27 ± 0.12 | 1.12 ± 0.07 | 1.14 ± 0.13 | 1.10 ± 0.08 |
|
|
|
| 1.000 | 1.000 | 1.000 |
Comparison between the muscle tear and the healthy contralateral and ipsilateral muscle areas
tr number of tracks, trl length of tracks, tr volume of tracks, FA fractional anisotropy, MD mean diffusivity, AD axial diffusivity, RD radial diffusivity
ROI region of interest drawn on the muscle tear, ROI ROI drawn on the on the corresponding healthy contralateral muscle, ROI ROI drawn on a healthy area ipsilateral to the injury, ROI ROI drawn on an area matching the ROIhi on the contralateral limb, ^ Greenhouse Geisser
Bold type indicates statistically significant values (p<0.05)
Fig. 3Grade II muscle tear of the right rectus femoris muscle (blue arrow on the axial proton density fat-saturated image in a) of a 23-year-old professional football player. The injured area demonstrates lower fractional anisotropy (FA) (blue arrow on the FA map in b) than the corresponding healthy contralateral muscle (white arrow on the FA map in c)
Fig. 4Grade II lesion of the right medial gastrocnemius (blue arrow on the axial proton density fat-saturated image in a) of a 35-year-old football player. Fibre tracking of the injured area is illustrated (blue arrow in b) and of the ipsi- (b) and contralateral healthy areas (c). Although visually the fibre tracking of the injured muscle area seems to demonstrate shorter and less numerous fibres, no statistically significant differences occurred in our population comparing the tears with all healthy areas. The statistical analyses revealed significant differences in terms of length and amount of fibre tracts only when a ratio between the ROIs on the injured (i.e. represented here by the fibre tracts on the right calf in b) and contralateral extremity (i.e. represented here by the fibre tracts on the left calf in c) was calculated
Comparison of diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) metrics’ ratio between the injured leg and the contralateral healthy one
| ROItear/ROIhi | ROIhc_t/ROIhc_i | Students’ t-test | |
|---|---|---|---|
| trn | 0.55 ± 0.45 | 1.24 ± 0.53 |
|
| trl (mm) | 0.69 ± 0.22 | 1.14 ± 0.28 |
|
| trv (mm3) | 0.62 ± 0.40 | 1.26 ± 0.65 | 0.056 |
| FA | 0.88 ± 0.07 | 1.09 ± 0.15 |
|
| MD (10-3mm2/s) | 1.10 ± 0.04 | 1.04 ± 0.07 |
|
| AD | 1.06 ± 0.03 | 1.04 ± 0.04 | 0.241 |
| RD | 1.13 ± 0.06 | 1.03 ± 0.10 |
|
tr number of tracks, trl length of tracks, tr volume of tracks, FA fractional anisotropy, MD mean diffusivity, AD axial diffusivity, RD radial diffusivity, ROI/ROI ratio between the ROI drawn on the tear and the one drawn on a ipsilateral healthy area, ROI/ROI ratio of the two corresponding contralateral healthy areas
Bold type indicates statistically significant values (p<0.05)