BJR
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
British Journal of Radiology (1989) 62, 326-330
© 1989 British Institute of Radiology
doi:
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Lamminen, A. E.
Right arrow Articles by Korhola, O. A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Lamminen, A. E.
Right arrow Articles by Korhola, O. A.

The British Journal of Radiology, Vol 62, Issue 736 326-330, Copyright © 1989 by British Institute of Radiology

ARTICLES

Acute rhabdomyolysis: evaluation with magnetic resonance imaging compared with computed tomography and ultrasonography

AE Lamminen, PE Hekali, E Tiula, I Suramo and OA Korhola
Department of Diagnostic Radiology, University Central Hospital, Helsinki, Finland.

Fifteen patients with acute rhabdomyolysis were evaluated with low field magnetic resonance (MR) imaging and the results compared with those obtained using computed tomography (CT) and ultrasonography (US). With MR imaging, abnormal muscles with areas of increased signal intensity were seen in every patient, which probably reflects increased water content or increased mobility of water molecules caused by inflammatory reaction and oedema in the injured and necrotic muscles. Computed tomography without intravenous contrast medium demonstrated abnormal muscles in most patients examined with this modality. The CT findings consisted of areas of focal hypodensity in muscles. With US, abnormal muscles were seen in less than half of the patients studied. The normal structure of striated muscle was focally disturbed and areas of both decreased and increased echogenicity were found. Magnetic resonance imaging had a higher sensitivity in the detection of abnormal muscles than CT or US (100%, 62% and 42%, respectively). The findings of all these modalities are non-specific, but together with the clinical and laboratory data they confirm the diagnosis of rhabdomyolysis. The information gained from imaging studies is useful in the assessment of the extent and distribution of rhabdomyolysis. The precise identification of affected muscle compartments by MR imaging is valuable when surgical fasciotomy is considered for treatment; the procedure can then be appropriately directed to the compartments with clearly abnormal muscles.


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 RadioGraphicsHome page
C. S. Restrepo, D. F. Lemos, H. Gordillo, R. Odero, T. Varghese, W. Tiemann, F. F. Rivas, R. Moncada, and C. R. Gimenez
Imaging Findings in Musculoskeletal Complications of AIDS
RadioGraphics, July 1, 2004; 24(4): 1029 - 1049.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 ImagingHome page
R S D Campbell and J Wood
Ultrasound of muscle
Imaging, June 1, 2002; 14(3): 229 - 240.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 PERSPECT VASC SURG ENDOVASC THERHome page
W. C. Pevec and F. W. Blaisdell
Fasciotomy for Arterial Ischemia: Is It Justified?
Perspectives in Vascular Surgery and Endovascular Therapy, January 1, 1994; 7(1): 57 - 63.
[PDF]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
BJR DMFR IMAGING  ALL BIR JOURNALS 
Copyright © 1989 by the British Institute of Radiology.