Pediatric Radiology

, Volume 43, Issue 10, pp 1327–1335 | Cite as

Analysis of fatty infiltration and inflammation of the pelvic and thigh muscles in boys with Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD): grading of disease involvement on MR imaging and correlation with clinical assessments

  • Hee Kyung Kim
  • Arnold C. Merrow
  • Sahar Shiraj
  • Brenda L. Wong
  • Paul S. Horn
  • Tal Laor
Original Article

Abstract

Background

Prior reports focus primarily on muscle fatty infiltration in Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD). However, the significance of muscle edema is uncertain.

Objective

To evaluate the frequency and degree of muscle fat and edema, and correlate these with clinical function.

Materials and methods

Forty-two boys (ages 5–19 years) with DMD underwent pelvic MRI. Axial T1- and fat-suppressed T2-weighted images were evaluated to grade muscle fatty infiltration (0–4) and edema (0–3), respectively. Degree and frequency of disease involvement were compared to clinical evaluations.

Results

Gluteus maximus had the greatest mean fatty infiltration score, followed by adductor magnus and gluteus medius muscles, and had the most frequent and greatest degree of fatty infiltration. Gluteus maximus also had the greatest mean edema score, followed by vastus lateralis and gluteus medius muscles. These muscles had the most frequent edema, although the greatest degree of edema was seen in other muscles. There was correlation between cumulative scores of fatty infiltration and all clinical evaluations (P < 0.05).

Conclusion

In DMD, the muscles with the most frequent fatty infiltration had the greatest degree of fatty infiltration and correlated with patient function. However, the muscles with the most frequent edema were different from those with the greatest degree of edema. Thus, edema may not predict patient functional status.

Keywords

MRI Muscle Duchenne muscular dystrophy Children 

References

  1. 1.
    Dooley J, Gordon KE, Dodds L et al (2010) Duchenne muscular dystrophy: a 30-year population-based incidence study. Clin Pediatr (Phila) 49:177–179CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Monaco AP (1993) Molecular human genetics and the Duchenne/Becker muscular dystrophy gene. Mol Cell Biol Hum Dis Ser 3:1–11PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Petrof BJ, Shrager JB, Stedman HH et al (1993) Dystrophin protects the sarcolemma from stresses developed during muscle contraction. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 90:3710–3714PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Mavrogeni S, Papavasiliou A, Spargias K et al (2010) Myocardial inflammation in Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy as a precipitating factor for heart failure: a prospective study. BMC Neurol 10:33PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Angelini C (2007) The role of corticosteroids in muscular dystrophy: a critical appraisal. Muscle Nerve 36:424–435PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Caskey CT, Ward P, Hejtmancik F (1988) DMD carrier detection and prenatal diagnosis via recombinant DNA methods. Adv Neurol 48:83–91PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Marden FA, Connolly AM, Siegel MJ et al (2005) Compositional analysis of muscle in boys with Duchenne muscular dystrophy using MR imaging. Skeletal Radiol 34:140–148PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Schreiber A, Smith WL, Ionasescu V et al (1987) Magnetic resonance imaging of children with Duchenne muscular dystrophy. Pediatr Radiol 17:495–497PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Sookhoo S, Mackinnon I, Bushby K et al (2007) MRI for the demonstration of subclinical muscle involvement in muscular dystrophy. Clin Radiol 62:160–165PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Gong QY, Phoenix J, Kemp GJ et al (2000) Estimation of body composition in muscular dystrophy by MRI and stereology. J Magn Reson Imaging 12:467–475PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kim HK, Laor T, Horn PS et al (2010) T2 mapping in Duchenne muscular dystrophy: distribution of disease activity and correlation with clinical assessments. Radiology 255:899–908PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Liu GC, Jong YJ, Chiang CH et al (1993) Duchenne muscular dystrophy: MR grading system with functional correlation. Radiology 186:475–480PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Swinyard CA, Deaver GG, Greenspan L (1957) Gradients of functional ability of importance in rehabilitation of patients with progressive muscular and neuromuscular diseases. Arch Phys Med Rehabil 38:574–579PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Tannus A, Garwood M (1997) Adiabatic pulses. NMR Biomed 10:423–434PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Mercuri E, Pichiecchio A, Allsop J et al (2007) Muscle MRI in inherited neuromuscular disorders: past, present, and future. J Magn Reson Imaging 25:433–440PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Carlo B, Roberta P, Roberto S et al (2006) Limb-girdle muscular dystrophies type 2A and 2B: clinical and radiological aspects. Basic Appl Myol 16:17–25Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    May DA, Disler DG, Jones EA et al (2000) Abnormal signal intensity in skeletal muscle at MR imaging: patterns, pearls, and pitfalls. Radiographics 20:S295–S315PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kim HK, Laor T, Horn PS et al (2010) Quantitative assessment of the T2 relaxation time of the gluteus muscles in children with Duchenne muscular dystrophy: a comparative study before and after steroid treatment. Korean J Radiol 11:304–311PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Wren TA, Bluml S, Tseng-Ong L et al (2008) Three-point technique of fat quantification of muscle tissue as a marker of disease progression in Duchenne muscular dystrophy: preliminary study. AJR Am J Roentgenol 190:W8–W12PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Mengiardi B, Schmid MR, Boos N et al (2006) Fat content of lumbar paraspinal muscles in patients with chronic low back pain and in asymptomatic volunteers: quantification with MR spectroscopy. Radiology 240:786–792PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    McDouall RM, Dunn MJ, Dubowitz V (1990) Nature of the mononuclear infiltrate and the mechanism of muscle damage in juvenile dermatomyositis and Duchenne muscular dystrophy. J Neurol Sci 99:199–217PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Baron D, Magot A, Ramstein G et al (2011) Immune response and mitochondrial metabolism are commonly deregulated in DMD and aging skeletal muscle. PLoS One 6:e26952PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Jaramillo D, Laor T (2008) Pediatric musculoskeletal MRI: basic principles to optimize success. Pediatr Radiol 38:379–391PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Straub V, Donahue KM, Allamand V et al (2000) Contrast agent-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging of skeletal muscle damage in animal models of muscular dystrophy. Magn Reson Med 44:655–659PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Schmidt S, Vieweger A, Obst M et al (2009) Dysferlin-deficient muscular dystrophy: gadofluorine M suitability at MR imaging in a mouse model. Radiology 250:87–94PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Hee Kyung Kim
    • 1
  • Arnold C. Merrow
    • 1
  • Sahar Shiraj
    • 1
  • Brenda L. Wong
    • 2
  • Paul S. Horn
    • 2
    • 3
  • Tal Laor
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of RadiologyCincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical CenterCincinnatiUSA
  2. 2.Department of NeurologyCincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical CenterCincinnatiUSA
  3. 3.Department of Mathematical SciencesUniversity of CincinnatiCincinnatiUSA

Personalised recommendations