Visual versus quantitative analysis of muscle ultrasound in neuromuscular disease

Introduction/Aims Visual and quantitative muscle ultrasound are both valid diagnostic tools in neuromuscular diseases. To optimize muscle ultrasound evaluation and facilitate its use in neuromuscular disease, we examined the correlation between visual and quantitative muscle ultrasound analysis and their pitfalls. Methods Retrospective data from 994 patients with 13,562 muscle ultrasound images were analyzed. Differences in echogenicity z-score distribution per Heckmatt grade and corresponding correlation coefficients were calculated. Results Overall, there was a correlation of 0.60 between the two scoring systems, with a gradual increase in z-score with increasing Heckmatt grades and vice versa. Patients with a neuromuscular disorder had higher Heckmatt grades (p < 0.001) and z-scores (median z-score = 0.30, p < 0.001) than patients without. The highest Heckmatt grades and z-scores were found in patients with either a dystrophy or inflammatory myopathy (both median Heckmatt grade of 2 and median z score of 0.74 and 1.20, respectively). Discrepant scores were infrequent (<2%), but revealed important pitfalls in both grading systems. Discussion Visual and quantitative muscle ultrasound are complementary techniques to evaluate neuromuscular disease and have a moderate positive correlation. Importantly, we identified specific pitfalls for visual and quantitative muscle ultrasound and how to overcome them in clinical practice.

Automated summary

Visual and quantitative muscle ultrasound are complementary techniques for evaluating neuromuscular diseases, with a moderate positive correlation. We have identified specific pitfalls of both visual and quantitative muscle ultrasound and how to overcome them in clinical practice.