↓ Skip to main content

Magnetic resonance imaging of leg muscles in patients with myotonic dystrophies

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Neurology, July 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
13 Mendeley
Title
Magnetic resonance imaging of leg muscles in patients with myotonic dystrophies
Published in
Journal of Neurology, July 2017
DOI 10.1007/s00415-017-8574-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Stojan Peric, Ruzica Maksimovic, Bojan Banko, Milica Durdic, Bogdan Bjelica, Ivo Bozovic, Yunus Balcik, Jovan Pesovic, Dusanka Savic-Pavicevic, Vidosava Rakocevic-Stojanovic

Abstract

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of muscles has recently become a significant diagnostic procedure in neuromuscular disorders. There is a lack of muscle MRI studies in patients with myotonic dystrophy type 1 (DM1), especially type 2 (DM2). To analyze fatty infiltration of leg muscles, using 3.0 T MRI in patients with genetically confirmed DM1 and DM2 with different disease durations. The study comprised 21 DM1 and 10 DM2 adult patients. Muscle MRI was performed in axial plane of the lower limbs using T1-weighted (T1w) sequence. Six-point scale by Mercuri et al. was used. Fatty infiltration registered in at least one muscle of lower extremities was found in 71% of DM1 and 40% of DM2 patients. In DM1 patients, early involvement of the medial head of gastrocnemius and tibialis anterior muscles was observed with later involvement of other lower leg muscles and of anterior and posterior thigh compartments with relative sparing of the rectus femoris. In DM2, majority of patients had normal MRI findings. Early involvement of lower legs and posterior thighs was found in some patients. Less severe involvement of the medial head of the gastrocnemius compared to other lower leg muscles was also observed, while involvement of proximal muscles was rather diffuse than selective. It seems that both in DM1 and DM2 some muscles may be affected before weakness is clinically noted and vice versa. We described characteristic pattern and way of progression of muscle involvement in DM1 and DM2.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 13 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 13 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 3 23%
Unspecified 2 15%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 15%
Researcher 2 15%
Student > Master 1 8%
Other 3 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 8 62%
Unspecified 4 31%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 8%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 11 December 2017.
All research outputs
#7,674,406
of 12,281,604 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Neurology
#1,513
of 2,319 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#153,650
of 269,709 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Neurology
#32
of 55 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,281,604 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,319 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.0. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 269,709 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 55 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.