Journal of ultrasound · 2024
The feasibility of visualizing and quantifying muscle changes in postoperative oral cancer patients using Quantitative Muscle Ultrasound (QMUS).
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Vander Cruyssen Emily, van de Ven Jelmer, Dik Eric, Knuijt Simone
Аннотация
PURPOSE: Quantitative muscle ultrasound (QMUS) is a patient friendly tool for examining orofacial muscles. Resection of tissue can have an effect on the architecture and function of these muscles. The aim of this study is to investigate the feasibility of visualizing and quantifying muscle changes in postoperative oral cancer patients and to relate the findings to tumor and patient characteristics.
METHODS: Adult patients with a resected first primary pT1 or T2 oral squamous cell carcinoma, at least one year post operatively, where included. Ultrasound data were collected of the geniohyoid muscle, digastric muscles, masseter muscle, transverse muscle and genioglossus muscle. Ultrasound images were labeled as clearly visible, questionable or unclear. Of the clear muscles, echogenicity and muscle thickness were measured.
RESULTS: 37 patients were included. The masseter muscle was clearly visible in all ultrasound images, both intrinsic tongue muscles had the lowest visibility (45.9%). There was a significant correlation between visibility and tumor localization for the genioglossus (p = 0.029). Age correlated with the visibility of the genioglossus muscle, BMI with the genioglossus and transverse muscles. Echogenicity and muscle thickness of the clearly identified muscles did not differ from normative values.
CONCLUSION: QMUS of orofacial muscles is feasible in postoperative oral cancer patients with relatively small tumor sizes. Tongue resections negatively affected the visibility of the two intrinsic tongue muscles. These preliminary results for particular muscles indicate that the use of ultrasound might be promising in oral cancer patients to help determine targeted goals in post-operative rehabilitation.
METHODS: Adult patients with a resected first primary pT1 or T2 oral squamous cell carcinoma, at least one year post operatively, where included. Ultrasound data were collected of the geniohyoid muscle, digastric muscles, masseter muscle, transverse muscle and genioglossus muscle. Ultrasound images were labeled as clearly visible, questionable or unclear. Of the clear muscles, echogenicity and muscle thickness were measured.
RESULTS: 37 patients were included. The masseter muscle was clearly visible in all ultrasound images, both intrinsic tongue muscles had the lowest visibility (45.9%). There was a significant correlation between visibility and tumor localization for the genioglossus (p = 0.029). Age correlated with the visibility of the genioglossus muscle, BMI with the genioglossus and transverse muscles. Echogenicity and muscle thickness of the clearly identified muscles did not differ from normative values.
CONCLUSION: QMUS of orofacial muscles is feasible in postoperative oral cancer patients with relatively small tumor sizes. Tongue resections negatively affected the visibility of the two intrinsic tongue muscles. These preliminary results for particular muscles indicate that the use of ultrasound might be promising in oral cancer patients to help determine targeted goals in post-operative rehabilitation.