Muscle geometry affects accuracy of forearm volume determination by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)
Muscle geometry affects accuracy of forearm volume determination by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/j.jbiomech.2007.04.005
复制
发表时间：
2007-01-01
影响因子：
2.4
通讯作者：
Ward, Samuel R.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Eng, Carolyn M.;Abrams, Geoff D.;Ward, Samuel R.
上肢肌肉骨骼建模正变得越来越复杂，创造了一个日益增长的需求，受试者特定的肌肉尺寸参数。确定受试者特定肌肉体积的一种方法是磁共振成像（MRI）。本研究的目的是确定人类前臂中各种肌肉大小和形状的mri肌肉体积的有效性。在3T MR系统上使用高各向同性空间分辨率（1 mm(3)体素）的快速衰减梯度回波脉冲序列扫描17具尸体前臂。旋前圆肌（PT）、桡腕短伸肌（ECRB）、拇长伸肌（EPL）、尺腕屈肌（FCU）和肱桡肌（BR）进行手工分割，以便计算体积。然后解剖前臂，分离肌肉，获得肌肉质量，从而计算肌肉体积。用类内相关系数（ICC2,1）和绝对体积差来比较测量方法。当所有43块肌肉一起考虑时，解剖和mri得出的肌肉体积之间的一致性非常好（ICC = 0.97，相对误差= 12.8%）。当考虑单个肌肉时，PT （ICC = 0.97，相对误差= 8.4%）、ECRB （ICC = 0.93，相对误差= 7.7%）和FCU （ICC = 0.91，相对误差= 9.8%）的测量方法之间具有良好的一致性，EPL （ICC = 0.68，相对误差= 21.6%）和BR （ICC = 0.93，相对误差= 17.2%）的测量方法具有良好的一致性。因此，虽然基于mri的肌肉体积测量在某些肌肉中产生相对较小的误差，但具有高表面积与体积比的肌肉可能容易产生分割误差，因此，这些测量的准确性可能是不可接受的。(C) 2007 Elsevier Ltd.版权所有。
Upper extremity musculoskeletal modeling is becoming increasingly sophisticated, creating a growing need for subject-specific muscle size parameters. One method for determining subject-specific muscle volume is magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). The purpose of this study was to determine the validity of MRI-derived muscle volumes in the human forearm across a variety of muscle sizes and shapes. Seventeen cadaveric forearms were scanned using a fast-spoiled gradient echo pulse sequence with high isotropic spatial resolution (1 mm(3) voxels) on a 3T MR system. Pronator teres (PT), extensor carpi radialis brevis (ECRB), extensor pollicis longus (EPL), flexor carpi ulnaris (FCU), and brachioradialis (BR) muscles were manually segmented allowing volume to be calculated. Forearms were then dissected, muscles isolated, and muscle masses obtained, which allowed computation of muscle volume. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC2,1) and absolute volume differences were used to compare measurement methods. There was excellent agreement between the anatomical and MRI-derived muscle volumes (ICC = 0.97, relative error = 12.8%) when all 43 muscles were considered together. When individual muscles were considered, there was excellent agreement between measurement methods for PT (ICC = 0.97, relative error = 8.4%), ECRB (ICC = 0.93, relative error = 7.7%), and FCU (ICC = 0.91, relative error = 9.8%), and fair agreement for EPL (ICC = 0.68, relative error = 21.6%) and BR (ICC = 0.93, relative error = 17.2%). Thus, while MRI-based measurements of muscle volume produce relatively small errors in some muscles, muscles with high surface area-to-volume ratios may predispose them to segmentation error, and, therefore, the accuracy of these measurements may be unacceptable. (C) 2007 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.