Key result
Magnetic resonance imaging had a higher sensitivity (100%) in the detection of abnormal muscles in acute rhabdomyolysis compared with computed tomography (62%) and ultrasonography (42%).
Why the study?
Does magnetic resonance imaging improve the detection of abnormal muscles compared to computed tomography and ultrasonography in patients with acute rhabdomyolysis?
Population
15 patients with acute rhabdomyolysis
Comparison
Low field magnetic resonance (MR) imaging vs Computed tomography without intravenous contrast…
Design
Case_series
Authors
Loading...
May support MRI for muscle assessment in rhabdomyolysis; leaves open prospective validation before clinical adoption.
Observational (n=15)
Does magnetic resonance imaging improve the detection of abnormal muscles compared to computed tomography and ultrasonography in patients with acute rhabdomyolysis?
Absolute Event Rate: 100% vs 62%
MRI is highly sensitive (100%) for detecting abnormal muscles in acute rhabdomyolysis, outperforming CT and US, and is valuable for guiding surgical fasciotomy.
Lamminen et al. (1989) conducted an observational in Acute rhabdomyolysis (n=15). Magnetic resonance (MR) imaging vs. Computed tomography (CT) and ultrasonography (US) was evaluated on Sensitivity in the detection of abnormal muscles. Magnetic resonance imaging had a higher sensitivity (100%) in the detection of abnormal muscles in acute rhabdomyolysis compared with computed tomography (62%) and ultrasonography (42%).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: