Skeletal Radiology

, Volume 41, Issue 8, pp 955–961 | Cite as

Muscle fat-fraction and mapping in Duchenne muscular dystrophy: evaluation of disease distribution and correlation with clinical assessments

Preliminary experience
  • Michele Gaeta
  • Sonia Messina
  • Achille Mileto
  • Gian Luca Vita
  • Giorgio Ascenti
  • Sergio Vinci
  • Antonio Bottari
  • Giuseppe Vita
  • Nicola Settineri
  • Daniele Bruschetta
  • Sergio Racchiusa
  • Fabio Minutoli
Scientific Article

Abstract

Purpose

To examine the usefulness of dual-echo dual-flip angle spoiled gradient recalled (SPGR) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) technique in quantifying muscle fat fraction (MFF) of pelvic and thighs muscles as a marker of disease severity in boys with Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD), by correlating MFF calculation with clinical assessments. We also tried to identify characteristic patterns of disease distribution.

Materials and methods

Twenty consecutive boys (mean age, 8.6 years ± 2.3 [standard deviation, SD]; age range, 5–15 years; median age, 9 years;) with DMD were evaluated using a dual-echo dual-flip angle SPGR MRI technique, calculating muscle fat fraction (MFF) of eight muscles in the pelvic girdle and thigh (gluteus maximus, adductor magnus, rectus femoris, vastus lateralis, vastus medialis, biceps femoris, semitendinosus, and gracilis). Color-coded parametric maps of MFF were also obtained. A neurologist who was blinded to the MRI findings performed the clinical assessments (patient age, Medical Research Council score, timed Gower score, time to run 10 m). The relationships between mean MFF and clinical assessments were investigated using Spearman’s rho coefficient. Positive and negative correlations were evaluated and considered significant if the P value was < 0.05.

Results

The highest mean MFF was found in the gluteus maximus (mean, 46.3 % ± 24.5 SD), whereas the lowest was found in the gracilis muscle (mean, 2.7 % ± 4.7 SD). Mean MFF of the gluteus maximus was significantly higher than that of the other muscles (P < 0.01), except for the adductor magnus and biceps muscles. A significant positive correlation was found between the mean MFF of all muscles and the patients age (20 patients; P < 0.005), Medical Research Council score (19 patients; P < 0.001), timed Gower score (17 patients; P < 0.03), and time to run 10 m (20 patients; P < 0.001). A positive correlation was also found between the mean MFF of the gluteus maximus muscle and the timed Gower score. Color-coded maps provided an efficient visual assessment of muscle fat content and its heterogeneous distribution.

Conclusion

Muscle fat fraction calculation and mapping using the dual-echo dual-flip angle SPGR MRI technique are useful markers of disease severity and permit patterns of disease distribution to be identified in patients with DMD.

Keywords

Dual-echo dual-flip angle MRI technique Muscle fat fraction Color-coded maps Duchenne muscular dystrophy Clinical assessments Timed Gower score 

References

  1. 1.
    Dubowitz V. The muscular dystrophies. In: Muscle disorders in childhood. 2nd ed. London: Saunders, 1995; 39–42.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Mercuri E, Mayhew A, Muntoni F, et al. On behalf of the TREAT-NMD Neuromuscular Network. Towards harmonisation of outcome measures for DMD and SMA within TREAT-NMD; report of three expert workshops: TREATNMD/ENMC workshop on outcome measures, 12th–13th May 2007, Naarden, The Netherlands; TREAT-NMD workshop on outcome measures in experimental trials for DMD, 30th June–1st July 2007, Naarden, The Netherlands; Conjoint Institute of Myology TREAT-NMD Meeting on physical activity monitoring in neuromuscular disorders, 11th July 2007, Paris, France. Neuromuscul Disord. 2008;18:894–903.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Brooke MH, Griggs RC, Mendell JR, Fenichel GM, Shumate JB, Pellegrino RJ. Clinical trial in Duchenne dystrophy. The design of the protocol. Muscle Nerve. 1981;4:186–97.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Scott OM, Hyde SA, Goddard C, Dubowitz V. Quantitation of muscle function in children: a prospective study in Duchenne muscular dystrophy. Muscle Nerve. 1982;5:291–301.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Florence JM, Pandya S, King WM, et al. Intrarater reliability of manual muscle test (Medical Research Council scale) grades in Duchenne’s muscular dystrophy. Phys Ther. 1992;72:115–22.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Mayhew JE, Florence JM, Mayhew TP, et al. Reliable surrogate outcome measures in multicenter clinical trials of Duchenne muscular dystrophy. Muscle Nerve. 2007;35:36–42.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Mazzone ES, Messina S, Vasco G, et al. Reliability of the North Star Ambulatory Assessment in a multicentric setting. Neuromuscul Disord. 2009;19:458–61.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Mazzone E, Martinelli D, Berardinelli A, et al. North Star Ambulatory Assessment, 6-minute walk test and timed items in ambulant boys with Duchenne muscular dystrophy. Neuromuscul Disord. 2010;20:712–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Schreiber A, Smith WL, Ionasescu V, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging of children with Duchenne muscular dystrophy. Pediatr Radiol. 1987;17:495–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Liu GC, Jong YJ, Chiang CH, Jaw TS. Duchenne muscular dystrophy: MR grading system with functional correlation. Radiology. 1993;186:475–80.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Marden FA, Connolly AM, Siegel MJ, Rubin DA. Compositional analysis of muscle in boys with Duchenne muscular dystrophy using MR imaging. Skeletal Radiol. 2005;34:140–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Huang Y, Majumdar S, Genant HK, et al. Quantitative MR relaxometry study of muscle composition and function in Duchenne muscular dystrophy. J Magn Reson Imaging. 1994;4:59–64.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Phoenix J, Betal D, Roberts N, Helliwell TR, Edwards RH. Objective quantification of muscle and fat in human dystrophic muscle by magnetic resonance image analysis. Muscle Nerve. 1996;19:302–10.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kim HK, Laor T, Horn PS, Racadio JM, Wong B, Dardzinski BJ. T2 mapping in Duchenne muscular dystrophy: distribution of disease activity and correlation with clinical assessments. Radiology. 2010;225:899–908.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Wren TA, Bluml S, Tseng-Ong L, Gilsanz V. 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. 2008;190:W8–12.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Gaeta M, Scribano E, Mileto A, et al. Muscle fat fraction in neuromuscular disorder: dual-echo dual-flip-angle spoiled gradient-recalled MR imaging technique for quantification—a feasibility study. Radiology. 2011;259:487–94.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Gaeta M, Mileto A, Mazzeo A, et al. MRI findings, patterns of disease distribution, and muscle fat fraction calculation in five patients with Charcot-Marie-Tooth type 2 F disease. Skeletal Radiol 2011;doi:10.1007/s00256-011-1199-y.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Rosset A, Spadola L, Ratib O. OsiriX: an open-source software for navigating in multidimensional DICOM images. J Digit Imaging. 2004;17:205–16.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Muntoni F, Bushby KD, Van Ommen G. 149th ENMC International Workshop and 1st Treat-NMD Workshop on “Planning phase I/II clinical trials using systematically delivered antisense oligonucleotides in Duchenne muscular dystrophy”. Neuromuscul Disord. 2008;18:268–75.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Eagle M, Baudouin S, Chandler C, Giddings DR, Bullock R, Bushby K. Survival in Duchenne muscular dystrophy: improvements in life expectancy since 1967 and the impact of home nocturnal ventilation. Neuromuscul Disord. 2002;12:926–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Wagner KR. Approaching a new age in Duchenne muscular dystrophy treatment. Neurotherapeutics. 2008;5:583–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Yokota T, Takeda S, Lu QL, Partridge TA, Nakamura A, Hoffman EP. A renaissance of antisense oligonucleotide drugs in neurology: exon skipping breaks new ground. Arch Neurol. 2009;66:32–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Muntoni F, Wels D. Genetic treatments in muscular dystrophies. Curr Opin Neurol. 2007;20:590–4.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Kinali M, Arechavala-Gomeza V, Feng L, et al. Local restoration of dystrophin expression with the morpholino oligomer AVI-4658 in Duchenne muscular dystrophy: a single-blind, placebo controlled, dose-escalation, proof-of-concept study. Lancet Neurol. 2009;8:918–28.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Sookhoo S, Mackinnon I, Bushby K, Chinnery PF, Birchall D. MRI for the demonstration of subclinical muscle involvement in muscular dystrophy. Clin Radiol. 2007;62:160–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Ma J. Dixon techniques for water and fat imaging. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2008;28:543–58.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Bernard CP, Liney GP, Manton DJ, Turnbull LW, Langton CM. Comparison of fat quantification methods: a phantom study at 3.0 T. J Magn Reson Imaging. 2008;27:192–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© ISS 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Michele Gaeta
    • 1
  • Sonia Messina
    • 2
  • Achille Mileto
    • 1
  • Gian Luca Vita
    • 2
  • Giorgio Ascenti
    • 1
  • Sergio Vinci
    • 1
  • Antonio Bottari
    • 1
  • Giuseppe Vita
    • 2
  • Nicola Settineri
    • 1
  • Daniele Bruschetta
    • 3
  • Sergio Racchiusa
    • 1
  • Fabio Minutoli
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Radiological Sciences, Policlinico “G. Martino”MessinaItaly
  2. 2.Department of Neurosciences, Policlinico “G. Martino”MessinaItaly
  3. 3.Department of Biomorphology and Biotechnologies, Policlinico “G. Martino”MessinaItaly

Personalised recommendations