6533b82afe1ef96bd128b99d
RESEARCH PRODUCT
In vivo muscle morphology comparison in post-stroke survivors using ultrasonography and diffusion tensor imaging.
Gaia Valentina PennatiRuoli WangRuoli WangSven PeterssonSven PeterssonOlga TarassovaKangqiao ZhaoAnton ArndtMarius SchlippeClara KörtingTaija Finnisubject
0301 basic medicineAdultMaleFysiologiPhysiologylcsh:MedicineSkeletal musclelihaksettuki- ja liikuntaelimetArticle03 medical and health sciencesMuscle morphology0302 clinical medicinemorfologiaIn vivomedicineHumansin vivo -menetelmädiffuusiotensorikuvausSurvivorsskeletal musclelcsh:ScienceMuscle SkeletalAgedUltrasonographyMultidisciplinarybusiness.industrylcsh:RSkeletal muscleMiddle AgedIndividual leveldiffusion tensor imagingStroke030104 developmental biologymedicine.anatomical_structureDiffusion Tensor ImagingPost strokelcsh:QFemaleUltrasonographyMuscle architecturebusinessBiomedical engineering030217 neurology & neurosurgeryBiomedical engineeringDiffusion MRIdescription
AbstractSkeletal muscle architecture significantly influences the performance capacity of a muscle. A DTI-based method has been recently considered as a new reference standard to validate measurement of muscle structure in vivo. This study sought to quantify muscle architecture parameters such as fascicle length (FL), pennation angle (PA) and muscle thickness (tm) in post-stroke patients using diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) and to quantitatively compare the differences with 2D ultrasonography (US) and DTI. Muscle fascicles were reconstructed to examine the anatomy of the medial gastrocnemius, posterior soleus and tibialis anterior in seven stroke survivors using US- and DTI-based techniques, respectively. By aligning the US and DTI coordinate system, DTI reconstructed muscle fascicles at the same scanning plane of the US data can be identified. The architecture parameters estimated based on two imaging modalities were further compared. Significant differences were observed for PA and tm between two methods. Although mean FL was not significantly different, there were considerable intra-individual differences in FL and PA. On the individual level, parameters measured by US agreed poorly with those from DTI in both deep and superficial muscles. The significant differences in muscle parameters we observed suggested that the DTI-based method seems to be a better method to quantify muscle architecture parameters which can provide important information for treatment planning and to personalize a computational muscle model.
year | journal | country | edition | language |
---|---|---|---|---|
2019-01-01 | Scientific reports |