| Literature DB >> 30810778 |
Abdulrahman M Alfuraih1,2,3, Philip O'Connor4, Ai Lyn Tan5,4, Elizabeth M A Hensor5,4, Andreas Ladas4, Paul Emery5,4, Richard J Wakefield5,4.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To investigate muscle stiffness in patients with idiopathic inflammatory myopathies (IIM) using shear wave elastography (SWE) and to correlate the results with muscle strength and MRI features of myositis.Entities:
Keywords: Elastography; Muscle; Myositis; Shear wave elastography; Ultrasound
Mesh:
Year: 2019 PMID: 30810778 PMCID: PMC6584706 DOI: 10.1007/s00256-019-03175-3
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Skeletal Radiol ISSN: 0364-2348 Impact factor: 2.199
Clinical data of all idiopathic inflammatory myopathies (IIM) patients
| Case number | Sex | Age (years) | Diagnosis | Disease duration (months) | CK level (IU/L)a | Treatment |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Female | 76.5 | Undifferentiated IIM | 20 | 601 | Prednisolone |
| 2 | Male | 54.7 | Undifferentiated IIM | 1.1 | 708 | Methylprednisolone, prednisolone |
| 3 | Female | 58.6 | Overlap myositis (polymyositis and rheumatoid arthritis) | 0.2 | 2,662 | Methylprednisolone, prednisolone |
| 4 | Female | 63.0 | Undifferentiated IIM | 6.5 | 324 | Methotrexate, prednisolone |
| 5 | Male | 38.2 | Dermatomyositis | 0.5 | 1,375 | None |
| 6 | Female | 50.9 | Polymyositis | 2.4 | 1,000 | Mycophenolate, prednisolone |
| 7 | Male | 57.0 | Polymyositis | 108.7 | 757 | Methotrexate |
| 8 | Male | 40.7 | Undifferentiated IIM | 34.8 | 12,802 | Methotrexate, prednisolone |
| 9 | Female | 74.6 | Undifferentiated IIM | 2.1 | 777 | Intravenous immunoglobulins, prednisolone |
| 10 | Female | 35.8 | Polymyositis | 8.1 | 1,205 | Prednisolone, azathioprine |
| 11 | Female | 59.1 | Polymyositis | 198.5 | 347 | Methotrexate |
| 12 | Male | 77.9 | Inclusion body myositis | 6.1 | 190 | Methotrexate |
| 13 | Female | 23.1 | Dermatomyositis | 0.4 | 4,553 | Prednisolone |
| 14 | Female | 40.5 | Dermatomyositis | 8.6 | 70 | Hydroxychloroquine |
| 15 | Male | 52.7 | Overlap myositis (mixed connective tissue disease and myositis) | 64.3 | 692 | Methotrexate, hydroxychloroquine |
| 16 | Female | 49.1 | Dermatomyositis | 177.2 | 1,784 | Mycophenolate, hydroxychloroquine, prednisolone |
| 17 | Male | 58.4 | Inclusion body myositis | 19.9 | 399 | Methotrexate |
| 18 | Female | 43.6 | Undifferentiated IIM | 1.6 | 763 | Methotrexate, hydroxychloroquine |
| 19 | Female | 53.5 | Undifferentiated IIM | 26.3 | 72 | Mycophenolate, prednisolone |
| 20 | Male | 49.8 | Polymyositis | 44.9 | 1,225 | Cyclophosphamide, prednisolone |
| 21 | Female | 21.0 | Undifferentiated IIM | 31.2 | 33 | Hydroxychloroquine |
| 22 | Male | 60.5 | Inclusion body myositis | 0.4 | 1,184 | None |
| 23 | Male | 20.4 | Polymyositis | 2.1 | 634 | Prednisolone |
aNormal value is 25–200 IU/L for women and 40–320 IU/L for men
Characteristics of the study participants
| Characteristic | IIM patients | Healthy controls | Difference (%) | 95% CI of the difference | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean (%)a | 95% CI | Mean (%)a | 95% CI | ||||
| Sex | 13 females (56.5) | – | 13 females (56.5) | – | – | – | 1.00 |
| Age | 50.4 (16.1) | 43.4, 57.4 | 50.7 (16.2) | 43.7, 57.7 | −0.31 (−0.6) | −9.9, 9.3 | 0.95 |
| Males | 51.0 (15.4) | 40.0, 62.0 | 52.1 (16.0) | 40.7, 63.6 | −1.1 (−2.1) | −15.8, 13.6 | 0.87 |
| Females | 49.9 (17.2) | 39.6, 60.3 | 49.6 (17.0) | 39.4, 59.9 | 0.3 (0.6) | −13.5, 14.1 | 0.96 |
| Height (cm) | 169.0 (9.8) | 164.7, 173.4 | 169.3 (10.5) | 164.7, 173.8 | −0.3 (−0.2) | −6.3, 5.8 | 0.92 |
| Weight (kg) | 75.2 (11.2) | 70.1, 80.2 | 72.9 (14.4) | 67.0, 79.1 | 2.25 (3.2) | −5.5, 10.0 | 0.56 |
| Body mass index | 26.5 (5.4) | 24.2, 28.8 | 25.3 (3.9) | 23.6, 26.9 | 1.25 (4.7) | −1.5, 4.0 | 0.37 |
| Waist–hip ratio | 0.90 (0.01) | 0.86, 0.94 | 0.86 (0.01) | 0.82, 0.90 | 0.04 (4.7) | −0.01, 0.09 | 0.16 |
| Smoking | 9 (39) | – | 12 (52) | – | – | – | 0.37 |
| Smoking pack-years | 21.0 (15.6) | 9.7, 33.7 | 13.1 (19.6) | 0.7, 25.6 | 8.6 (60.3) | −8.0, 25.2 | 0.29 |
| Drinking alcohol | 8 (35) | – | 5 (22) | – | – | – | 0.33 |
| Consumption (units/week) | 3.7 (3.5) | 0.7, 6.7 | 7.5 (2.5) | 4.3, 10.7 | −3.8 (−50.7) | −7.9, 0.2 | 0.06 |
| Visual analogue score (mm) | 53.2 (19.0) | 45.0, 61.4 | 11.3 (16.0) | 4.4, 18.3 | 41.8 (370) | 31.4, 52.3 | |
| ETGUGT, sit to stand (s) | 2.5 (3.0) | 1.0, 3.9 | 1.0 (0.3) | 0.9, 1.1 | 1.5 (150) | 0.2, 2.7 | |
| ETGUGT, gait initiation (s) | 1.4 (0.9) | 1.0, 1.9 | 0.9 (0.4) | 0.7, 1.0 | 0.6 (55.6) | 0.1, 1.0 | |
| ETGUGT, walk 1 (s) | 6.2 (1.8) | 5.4, 7.1 | 4.3 (0.8) | 3.9, 4.7 | 1.9 (44.2) | 1.1, 2.8 | |
| ETGUGT, turn around (s) | 4.3 (1.4) | 3.6, 4.9 | 3.0 (0.5) | 2.8, 3.2 | 1.2 (43.3) | 0.5, 2.0 | |
| ETGUGT, walk 2 (s) | 6.4 (1.9) | 5.4, 7.4 | 4.4 (0.8) | 4.1, 4.7 | 2 (45.5) | 1.0, 3.0 | |
| ETGUGT, slow, stop (s) | 4.5 (1.7) | 3.7, 5.3 | 2.7 (0.6) | 2.4, 2.9 | 1.8 (66.7) | 0.9, 2.6 | |
| ETGUGT, total time (s) | 25.3 (9.0) | 20.8, 29.8 | 16.2 (2.7) | 15.1, 17.4 | 9.1 (56.2) | 4.4, 13.7 | |
| 30-s chair sit-to-stands | 5.1 (5.4) | 2.8, 7.5 | 18.6 (5.2) | 16.3, 20.8 | −13.4 (−72.6) | −16.6-10.3 | |
| Handgrip strength (kg) | 16.3 (10.4) | 11.8, 20.8 | 37.6 (12.5) | 32.0, 43.2 | −21.3 (−56.6) | −28.2-14.4 | |
| Knee extension torque (Nm/kg) | 0.52 (1.02)b | 0.29, 0.85 | 1.53 (0.70)b | 1.25, 1.75 | −1.01 (−66.0) | −1.22, −0.53 | |
| Knee flexion torque (Nm/kg) | 0.36 (0.28)b | 0.24, 0.45 | 0.86 (0.43)b | 0.70, 0.99 | −0.5 (−58.1) | −0.64, −0.29 | |
| Knee extension power (W/kg) | 0.20 (0.62)b | 0.06, 0.55 | 0.92 (0.43)b | 0.72, 1.09 | −0.72 (−78.3) | −0.82, −0.38 | |
| Knee flexion power (W/kg) | 0.17 (0.21)b | 0.10, 0.26 | 0.55 (0.21)b | 0.47, 0.63 | −0.38 (−69.1) | −0.46, −0.24 | |
ETGUGT expanded timed get-up-and-go test
*p values significant at 95% are in italics. Continuous variables were tested via independent t test or Mann–Whitney U test, and categorical data were tested using the Chi-squared test
aData in parentheses represent standard deviations for means or percentages for ratio
bMedian and interquartile range (95% confidence interval for the median values is generated based on 1,000 bootstrap samples)
Shear wave elastography measurements of the scanned muscles for the IIM patients and healthy controls
| Muscle | IIM patients | Healthy controls | Difference | 95% CI of the differenceb | Effect size | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mediana | 95% CI | Mediana | 95% CI | |||||
| Vastus lateralis | 1.35 (0.32) | 1.26, 1.44 | 1.68 (0.23) | 1.62, 1.76 | −0.33 (−19.6%) | −0.42, −0.20 | 1.18 | |
| Passively stretched | 2.60 (0.68) | 2.36, 2.93 | 2.65 (0.51) | 2.56, 2.81 | −0.05 (−1.9%) | −0.31, 0.21 | 0.504 | 0.08 |
| Rectus femoris | 1.52 (0.33) | 1.43, 1.65 | 1.81 (0.23) | 1.71, 1.85 | −0.29 (−16.0%) | −0.32, −0.10 | 1.02 | |
| Passively stretched | 2.23 (0.53) | 2.05, 2.43 | 2.20 (0.36) | 2.12, 2.27 | 0.03 (1.4%) | −0.20, 0.21 | 0.989 | 0.06 |
| Vastus medialis | 1.36 (0.16) | 1.33, 1.46 | 1.60 (0.21) | 1.55, 1.74 | −0.24 (−15.0%) | −0.34, −0.13 | 1.28 | |
| Passively stretched | 2.28 (0.49) | 2.10, 2.48 | 2.39 (0.38) | 2.29, 2.58 | −0.11 (4.6%) | −0.39, 0.03 | 0.091 | 0.25 |
| Vastus intermedius | 1.62 (0.49) | 1.46, 1.82 | 1.86 (0.22) | 1.78, 1.95 | −0.24 (−12.9%) | −0.42, −0.08 | 0.63 | |
| Passively stretched | 2.37 (0.39) | 2.30, 2.56 | 2.36 (0.28) | 2.25, 2.47 | 0.01 (0.4%) | −0.12, 0.23 | 0.454 | 0.02 |
| Biceps brachii | 1.85 (0.28) | 1.72, 1.90 | 1.78 (0.20) | 1.75, 1.90 | 0.07 (3.9%) | −0.08, 0.14 | 0.509 | 0.28 |
| Biceps femoris | 1.30 (0.14) | 1.28, 1.45 | 1.67 (0.20) | 1.58, 1.76 | −0.37 (−22.2%) | −0.44, −0.26 | 2.14 | |
| Semitendinosus | 1.33 (0.31) | 1.26, 1.40 | 1.66 (0.23) | 1.58, 1.70 | −0.33 (−19.9%) | −0.42, −0.187 | 1.21 | |
| Semimembranosus | 1.36 (0.28) | 1.28, 1.51 | 1.71 (0.18) | 1.63, 1.76 | −0.35 (−20.5%) | −0.44, −0.23 | 1.48 | |
*p values significant at 95% are in italics. Results are based on independent sample t test of natural log-transformed values
aData in m/s with interquartile range (95% confidence interval for the median values are generated based on 1,000 bootstrap samples)
bThe 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for the difference between the medians is calculated based the Hodges–Lehmann method [31]
Fig. 1Clustered boxplot of shear wave velocity (m/s) by participant type. VL vastus lateralis, RF rectus femoris, VM vastus medialis, VI vastus intermedius, BF biceps femoris, ST semitendinosus, SM semimembranosus, BB biceps brachii, PS passively stretched
Fig. 2Shear wave elastography images from three idiopathy inflammatory myopathy (IIM) patients compared with comparable healthy controls’ muscles. VL vastus lateralis, SM semimembranosus, BB biceps brachii
Fig. 3Receiver operating characteristic curve for shear wave elastography performance in discriminating IIM and healthy muscles
Area under the operating characteristic results for the muscles tested using shear wave elastography based on disease presence
| Muscle | AUROC | 95% CI | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Vastus lateralis | 0.865 | 0.754, 0.975 | |
| Passively stretched | 0.525 | 0.344, 0.705 | 0.782 |
| Rectus femoris | 0.790 | 0.649, 0.930 | |
| Passively stretched | 0.507 | 0.324, 0.689 | 0.940 |
| Vastus medialis | 0.822 | 0.689, 0.954 | |
| Passively stretched | 0.644 | 0.471, 0.817 | 0.110 |
| Vastus intermedius | 0.746 | 0.590, 0.901 | |
| Passively stretched | 0.548 | 0.370, 0.725 | 0.560 |
| Biceps brachii | 0.532 | 0.359, 0.704 | 0.717 |
| Biceps femoris | 0.908 | 0.806, 1.000 | |
| Semitendinosus | 0.822 | 0.681, 0.963 | |
| Semimembranosus | 0.925 | 0.846, 1.000 |
*Significant p values are in italics
The association between MRI and shear wave elastography in IIM patients
| Muscle | Oedema | Fatty infiltration | Atrophy | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Vastus lateralis | Monotonic trend, | 0.27 | 0.14 | |
| Correlation ( | −0.099 (0.28) | −0.181 (0.14) | ||
| Rectus femoris | Monotonic trend, | 0.26 | 0.42 | 0.33 |
| Correlation ( | 0.112 (0.26) | −0.036 (0.42) | 0.075 (0.33) | |
| Vastus medialis | Monotonic trend, | 0.44 | 0.19 | |
| Correlation ( | −0.019 (0.45) | −0.148 (0.19) | ||
| Vastus intermedius | Monotonic trend, | 0.40 | 0.07 | 0.32 |
| Correlation ( | −0.042 (0.40) | −0.252 (0.07) | −0.083 (0.32) | |
| Biceps femoris | Monotonic trend, | 0.054 | 0.20 | |
| Correlation ( | −0.288 (0.054) | −0.150 (0.20) | ||
| Semitendinosus | Monotonic trend, | 0.45 | 0.21 | |
| Correlation ( | 0.022 (0.45) | −0.137 (0.21) | ||
| Semimembranosus | Monotonic trend, | 0.10 | 0.11 | |
| Correlation ( | −0.219 (0.10) | −0.212 (0.11) | ||
Significant p values are in italics
*The p value (one-sided test) of the Jonkheere–Terpstra test p value (significant at p < 0.05)
**The correlation coefficient and p value of Kendall’s tau-b correlations (significant at p < 0.05)
***Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (two-tailed)
****Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (two-tailed)
Fig. 4Bar graph of the significant decreasing monotonic trend between muscle stiffness and MRI oedema in the vastus medialis