Key result
Ultrasound examination of muscle is a useful modality for grading injury, assessing tissue repair, and evaluating intramuscular masses, sometimes appreciating features more easily than MRI.
Ultrasound is a useful modality for examining muscle injuries and masses, offering advantages like extended field of view and better appreciation of vascularity and calcification compared to MRI.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
May support adjunctive ultrasound in muscle assessment; leaves open prospective validation versus MRI.
Ultrasound examination of muscle is ideally performed with high-frequency linear array transducers, although low frequency probes may be required for deep-seated abnormalities in large individuals. Extended field of view imaging is useful to delineate extensive muscle abnormalities and helps provide clear representation of spatial relationships. Ultrasound grading of muscle injury can be performed, and follow-up studies can assess repair of muscle tissue and identify complications of the healing process. Although the appearances of intramuscular masses may be non-specific in many cases, ultrasound may demonstrate characteristics that help refine the differential diagnosis. Some features such as vascularity and intralesional calcification may be more easily appreciated on ultrasound than MRI.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Campbell et al. (2002) conducted a review in Muscle injury and abnormalities. Ultrasound vs. MRI was evaluated. Ultrasound examination of muscle is a useful modality for grading injury, assessing tissue repair, and evaluating intramuscular masses, sometimes appreciating features more easily than MRI.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: