Lehmann Urban Diana, Mohamed Mohamed, Ludolph Albert C, Kassubek Jan, Rosenbohm Angela
Department of Neurology, Ulm University, Ulm, Germany.
Department of Radiology/Neuroradiology, University and Rehabilitation Clinics Ulm, Ulm, Germany.
Ther Adv Neurol Disord. 2021 Feb 26;14:1756286420985256. doi: 10.1177/1756286420985256. eCollection 2021.
The role of muscle magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in the diagnostic procedures of myopathies is still controversially discussed. The current study was designed to analyze the status of qualitative muscle MRI, electromyography (EMG), and muscle biopsy in different cases of clinically suspected myopathy.
A total of 191 patients (male: = 112, female: = 79) with suspected myopathy who all received muscle MRI, EMG, and muscle biopsy for diagnostic reasons were studied, with the same location of biopsy and muscle MRI (either upper or lower extremities or paravertebral muscles). Muscle MRIs were analyzed using standard rating protocols by two different raters independently.
Diagnostic findings according to biopsy results and genetic testing were as follow: non-inflammatory myopathy: = 65, inflammatory myopathy (myositis): = 51, neurogenic: = 18, unspecific: = 23, and normal: = 34. The majority of patients showed myopathic changes in the EMG. Edema, atrophy, muscle fatty replacement, and contrast medium enhancement (CM uptake) in MRI were observed across all final diagnostic groups. Only 30% of patients from the myositis group ( = 15) showed CM uptake.
The study provides guidance in the definition of the impact of muscle MRI in suspected myopathy: despite being an important diagnostic tool, qualitative MRI findings could not distinguish different types of neuromuscular diagnostic groups in comparison with the gold standard histopathologic diagnosis and/or genetic testing. The results suggest that neither muscle edema nor gadolinium enhancement are able to secure a diagnosis of myositis. The current results do not support qualitative MRI as aiding in the diagnostic distinction of various myopathies. Quantitative muscle MRI is, however, useful in the diagnostic procedure of a suspected neuromuscular disease, especially with regard to assessing progression of a chronic myopathy by quantification of the degree of atrophy and fatty replacement and in exploring patterns of muscle group involvements in certain genetic myopathies.
肌肉磁共振成像(MRI)在肌病诊断过程中的作用仍存在争议。本研究旨在分析定性肌肉MRI、肌电图(EMG)及肌肉活检在不同临床疑似肌病病例中的情况。
共研究了191例疑似肌病患者(男性112例,女性79例),这些患者均因诊断需要接受了肌肉MRI、EMG及肌肉活检,活检和肌肉MRI的部位相同(上肢或下肢或椎旁肌)。两名不同的评估者独立使用标准评分方案对肌肉MRI进行分析。
根据活检结果和基因检测的诊断结果如下:非炎性肌病65例,炎性肌病(肌炎)51例,神经源性18例,非特异性23例,正常34例。大多数患者的EMG显示肌病性改变。在所有最终诊断组中均观察到MRI中的水肿、萎缩、肌肉脂肪替代和造影剂增强(CM摄取)。肌炎组中只有30%的患者(15例)显示有CM摄取。
本研究为肌肉MRI在疑似肌病中的影响定义提供了指导:尽管MRI是一种重要的诊断工具,但与金标准组织病理学诊断和/或基因检测相比,定性MRI结果无法区分不同类型的神经肌肉诊断组。结果表明,肌肉水肿和钆增强均不能确诊肌炎。目前的结果不支持定性MRI有助于区分各种肌病。然而,定量肌肉MRI在疑似神经肌肉疾病的诊断过程中是有用的,特别是在通过量化萎缩和脂肪替代程度评估慢性肌病的进展以及探索某些遗传性肌病中肌肉群受累模式方面。