4.7 Article

PROGRESSIVE MUSCLE ATROPHY AND WEAKNESS AFTER TREATMENT BY MANTLE FIELD RADIOTHERAPY IN HODGKIN LYMPHOMA SURVIVORS

Journal

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2010.11.064

Keywords

Hodgkin lymphoma; Dropped head syndrome; Mantle field radiotherapy; Muscle damage; Muscle ultrasound

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose: To describe the damage to the muscles and propose a pathophysiologic mechanism for muscle atrophy and weakness after mantle field radiotherapy in Hodgkin lymphoma (HL) survivors. Methods and Materials: We examined 12 patients treated by mantle field radiotherapy between 1969 and 1998. Besides evaluation of their symptoms, the following tests were performed: dynamometry; ultrasound of the sternocleidomastoid, biceps, and antebrachial flexor muscles; and needle electromyography of the neck, deltoid, and ultrasonographically affected arm muscles. Results: Ten patients (83%) experienced neck complaints, mostly pain and muscle weakness. On clinical examination, neck flexors were more often affected than neck extensors. On ultrasound, the sternocleidomastoid was severely atrophic in 8 patients, but abnormal-echo intensity was seen in only 3 patients. Electromyography of the neck muscles showed mostly myogenic changes, whereas the deltoid, biceps, and antebrachial flexor muscles seemed to have mostly neurogenic damage. Conclusions: Many patients previously treated by mantle field radiotherapy develop severe atrophy and weakness of the neck muscles. Neck muscles within the radiation field show mostly myogenic damage, and muscles outside the mantle field show mostly neurogenic damage. The discrepancy between echo intensity and atrophy suggests that muscle damage is most likely caused by an extrinsic factor such as progressive microvascular fibrosis. This is also presumed to cause damage to nerves within the radiated field, resulting in neurogenic damage of the deltoid and arm muscles. (C) 2012 Elsevier Inc.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available