Status
Not open for further replies.

Alyoop

Very helpful member
Joined
Jul 5, 2010
Messages
1,796
Reason
DX UMND/PLS
Country
NZ
State
NZ
City
NZ
Ultrasound in diagnosis of ALS

There has been a new article just published about the use of ultrasound to detect fasciculation. It's far more sensitive in picking up fasciculations than EMG. Fasciculations it appears has been given more weight in the diagnostic criteria for ALS.

So now will the undiagnosed be marched down to have ultrasounds? My husband is keen, I am not.

Aly
 
Last edited:
Re: Ultrasound in diagnosis of ALS

Please excuse the dodgy title. I don't usually write D x , which as we know adds the ALS

Ok fixed it, disregard this post
 
Wonder what it means for people like me, who have virtually no fasciculations but have an ALS diagnosis? I did have more, but taking vit D seems to have eliminated most of them.
 
Re: Ultrasound in diagnosis of ALS

There has been a new article just published about the use of ultrasound to detect fasciculation. It's far more sensitive in picking up fasciculations than EMG. Fasciculations it appears has been given more weight in the diagnostic criteria for ALS.

So now will the undiagnosed be marched down to have ultrasounds? My husband is keen, I am not.

Aly

It's an inevitable outgrowth of the Awaji revision to the El Escorial diagnostic criteria, in my view. The unfortunate thing is that a good many of the undiagnosed will ignore this part of the original findings of the Awaji group:

It is obvious that ALS cannot be diagnosed purely on the basis of a finding of FPs. Thus FPs only achieve diagnostic significance for ALS in the context of a clinically suspected diagnosis. Stable FPs of simple morphology occur in benign conditions, and FPs of complex morphology occur in many other neurogenic conditions ( Rosenfeld, 2000 ). The occurrence of FPs in other neurogenic disorders, for example in peripheral neuropathies, is an example of the importance of clinical context in diagnosis.

So, we'll see the following exchange in the DIHA of the future:

Q: "But my ultrasound said I have fasciculations!"

A: "So what? You don't have weakness, abnormal muscle tone, or abnormal reflexes in the muscles you had ultrasounded. Fasciculations alone don't mean anything."

Q: "Maybe they ultrasounded me too early."

Here's the Awaji criteria paper. Don't remember whether I posted it before or not.
 

Attachments

  • awaji.pdf
    156.8 KB · Views: 3,477
Last edited:
That's why I wasn't going to post it, but neurologists are excited about the find. I don't understand the seemingly important significance of getting a more sensitive test for fasciculations. The diagnosis of ALS remains primarily clinical with the EMG as support, ( in the absence of alternative diagnosis), I have always thought my fasciculations are benign, and would continue to think that in the absence of PSW and fibrillations. It seems my husband does not agree.

I have to give you something to do, :)
 
Re: Ultrasound in ALS diagnosis of ALS

That's why I wasn't going to post it, but neurologists are excited about the find. I don't understand the seemingly important significance of getting a more sensitive test for fasciculations. The diagnosis of ALS remains primarily clinical with the EMG as support, ( in the absence of alternative diagnosis), I have always thought my fasciculations are benign, and would continue to think that in the absence of PSW and fibrillations. It seems my husband does not agree.

I don't think we are talking about a "more sensitive" test for fasciculations with ultrasound. What I really think we are talking about is a test that is better tolerated by the patients and one in which a larger area can be scanned for a longer period of time without causing undue stress for either the operator or the patient so that the pesky little varmints can be officially recorded -- leading to the hypothetical situation in my previous post. No more worries about that extra cup of coffee (or extra pint at the pub) causing tremors in the operator's fingers. ;)

I have to give you something to do, :)

Not me, sweetie. By the time that ultrasound becomes the fasciculation detector of choice, I'll likely have shuffled off this mortal coil. Feel free to credit me when the first undiagnosed person uses the "ultrasounded me too soon" line, though. It (and a pint of your choice) would be a fitting memorial to me. ;)
 
Ha, hs. The tongue stats were interesting, if I remember correctly, in the Group with EMG, they got 0% compared to 83% with ultrasound. I do think they are talking more sensitive, but you have a point. Excuse the pun.........
Maybe the ultrasound looks at a much larger area rather than the more immediate area of the needle, therefore it wouldn't take a genius to see that the hit rate would be better. Who knows.
I still don't really understand the significance. Surely the discovery of denervation with PSW etc on EMG is all that is required, why do they need a more sensitive test for FP. It's not going to mean no EMG!

My other half tried to explain, but I still don't get how it would benefit me in any way what so ever..........?
 
Re: Ultrasound in ALS diagnosis of ALS

Ha, hs. The tongue stats were interesting, if I remember correctly, in the Group with EMG, they got 0% compared to 83% with ultrasound. I do think they are talking more sensitive, but you have a point. Excuse the pun.........

If the fasciculation is easier to see, the test is going to appear more sensitive. Put the tiny needle in the wrong spot, you might miss it. With the ultrasound, there are likely a number of locations along the muscle where you can observe fasciculations. And you will see them as opposed to having to interpret an oscilloscope tracing of a current waveform.

And how many patients are going to tolerate 20 or 30 minutes of a needle rooting around under their chin as compared to the number who will sit there with an ultrasound probe/transducer being moved around various locations on their face and under their chin for an hour. More time on target --> greater chance of getting a hit.

Maybe the ultrasound looks at a much larger area rather than the more immediate area of the needle, therefore it wouldn't take a genius to see that the hit rate would be better. Who knows.

That's my guess. If an ultrasound can pick out and display the beating heart of a first-trimester fetus, I have very little doubt that it could show very small and very mild fasciculations in larger muscles in an adult. It just surprises me that it took this long for somebody to try the experiment. My wife has worked in women's health for more than 20 years and the obstetrics community has been using ultrasound on the unborn for almost all of that time. Maybe it was the full-motion imaging capability that was lacking.

I still don't really understand the significance. Surely the discovery of denervation with PSW etc on EMG is all that is required, why do they need a more sensitive test for FP. It's not going to mean no EMG!

It's a new toy to play with. One more overpriced test in the diagnostic gauntlet for patients to endure and insurance companies or public health systems to pay for. Might be interesting to see if anyone has filed a patent for a system and method for detecting neuromuscular activity and abnormalities in such activities using sonography." That patent will be worth a small fortune.

And, as I suspect was the intent behind the Awaji criteria proposal in the first place, quicker diagnoses == more patients available for studies -- new drugs, therapies, etc. -- plus earlier patient eligibility for various government programs and assistance.

But then again, I'm the cynical sort. ;)
 
Re: Ultrasound in ALS diagnosis of ALS

I read abstracts of the Awaji criteria a couple of years ago now. At the time I came across them, this forum was flooded with scared twitchy people, and I thought if the Awaji standard was discussed here at all, there could easily be widespread panic among those already so inclined to panic, and not listen to reason or their neuro (or even get themselves to a doctor in the first place).

If ultrasound and Awaji become frequent topics of discussion here, hopefully, from the very first its talked about (i.e. NOW) and every time thereafter, those responding are able to steer those who are scared back to considering the entire picture of what is involved with considering MND, and what the manifestations of MND are, other than fasciculations.

That said, the concept of using ultrasound is of much interest to me in my own situation. I don't talk publicly much anymore about it, but, for the sake of what is being discussed here I will.

I originally was diagnosed with bulbar onset of ALS. Even back then I was not ‘typical,’ but, I met the El Escorial criteria. I'd had two EMGs of my bulbar region that were diagnostic for MND, I had abnormal reflexes throughout part of my body, but not all of it, and I had clinical weakness of the bulbar region. Spinal tap, MRI of brain stem, blood labs, and all other diagnostic testing turned up nothing abnormal. I had undergone increasingly aggressive immune-modulation therapy with no results at all; hence, inflammatory ALS mimics were ruled out.

However, when the weakness made its way into my limbs, and subsequent EMGs still were normal in those areas, it became more complicated. Eventually I had a single fiber EMG, which was abnormal too. Myasthenia Gravis had already been ruled out, but we tried Mestinon, just to be able to say that we did. It did not help, and made me worse.

At this point, my neurologist explained to me that even though I technically met diagnostic criteria for ALS, that it was her opinion that I had an unnamed MND variant.

My progression has been very slow. Early on I needed help with breathing and am reliant on bipap when I lay down, or sleeping (even sitting up asleep) I need it. I do have a PEG and use it for between 25% and 85% of my nutrition depending on the day. Testing revealed my swallow was impaired in the late winter/early spring of 2008(don't remember exactly); However, it was more than 3 years after that before the PEG was placed.

I believe that I am one of the people who would benefit greatly from the ultrasound guidance. I've not had an EMG in over two years. At this point, I cannot lift my right arm much due to atrophy of my scapula. It is 'winged' and gets moved out of place easily. Of course I have other issues more areas than just the shoulder and bulbar region, but the scapula weakness and atrophy is the most clear- cut example.

When I saw my neurologist last month we discussed perhaps having another EMG focusing on that shoulder blade. This differs from how many of us have EMGs performed. Oftentimes it’s the areas that do not seem to be affected which are tested first, because (as we all know if we've been reading here) the EMG picks up abnormality before the person senses a problem.

Like Helen, and Barry, I have never been very twitchy. Just am not. I notice more fasciculations when I'm tired. I was exhausted yesterday, caught sight of myself in the mirror, and the area between my eyebrows over the bridge of my nose was having a dance party! (But I couldn't feel it) so, who really knows when they're experiencing them if they can't actually feel them, and don't happen to see them.

In my completely non-professional opinion, the lack of EMG findings in my limbs up to this point (albeit its been 2+ years since one was performed) is related to the slowness of my progression. It goes hand in hand with the common acceptance that the longer it takes to diagnose ALS, the slower the progression will be, and the inverse, the clearer the picture, and quicker solid diagnosis; the faster the progression.
 
Last edited:
Re: Ultrasound in ALS diagnosis of ALS

rose,

The Awaji criteria have come up in the context that you're worried about only once that I know of -- in this thread. Take a look and see if I handled it the way that you think it needed to be handled. The discussion of the Awaji criteria starts with post #105 -- after the flame fest mid-thread.
 
Re: Ultrasound in ALS diagnosis of ALS

Allen, I just followed the hyperlink you supplied, and your answer was excellent. Additionally, the member who brought up Awaji, seems to be a perfect example of someone taking a portion of something they do not understand, and throwing it out there to "win" a discussion.

Even though its been said here on this forum ad nauseam, I'm going to say it in simple layman terms again, Its the type of fasciculation that matters, not the presence of them. In addition, with a motor neuron disease other electrophysiological evidence of denervation/renervation will be present.

Back to the original subject of this thread; it will be interesting to hear from someone who has had ultrasound done for this purpose. And, again, just like with an EMG, the accuracy of test result interpretations will rely on the skill of person performing the test.

I am old enough to where I remember when ultrasound was "new". When I was expecting my first child back in '76, I went to a small regional hospital for delivery, and ran into complications during labor. The medical team brought in the ultrasound machine, hooked me up, then admitted they really didn't understand it well enough to rely on what they were seeing, and ended up wheeling me into radiology for a traditional x-ray. (and let me tell you, lying on a cold hard metal table for an x-ray during transitional labor contractions is not something anyone ever needs to experience!)
 
OUCH Rose!

My husband has never had an ALS patient who can feel their fasciculations. I certainly feel mine. What I am wondering is, maybe fasciculations caused by denervation, as in ALS, feel completely different from Benign fasciculations?
I would love to know if anyone has ever done a study ? Its just a thought.
 
Re: Ultrasound in ALS diagnosis of ALS

Aly,

I don't know of studies. It would be interesting to know if there are any.

Using the example of the very common benign eye twitch that virtually everyone on the face of the planet must experience, I can say that the ones I have around my eyes now (when I do feel them) are much more fluttery for lack of a better word. They do not feel the same.

I've noticed when I talk to someone while I'm looking in a mirror, as in putting on my makeup; oftentimes I'll have fascis under my eye area, presumably from the act of using facial muscles to talk. Those I don't feel. And, as I said above, when I feel the upper eye area twitches, they most definitely feel different than they used to. I was thinking about that just today in fact.

The tongue has been discussed here before too, and I know that I don't feel the fasciculations in my tongue, and neither have any of the other Bulbarians who have responded. However, when my doctor put me on a trial of Mestinon, that made my tongue go nuts in the twitching department. I could feel it; it felt like pop rocks candy, and if I looked at my tongue there were all of these constantly moving indentations on the surface of my tongue, it looked like water droplets were falling onto it and causing an indent wherever, one "fell". Whatever the action is of the Mestinon upon the motor nerves, it caused a response distinctly different than my everyday fasciculations.
 
The twitching people get around the eyes is myokymia. They are much bigger twitches than fasciculations. I think my so called benign fasciculations are probably myokymia and that is probably similar for other twitches.
Even doctors can have trouble telling the two apart , so there is not much hope for the lay person:). If the twitch is big enough to move something, ie a finger jerks, toe jerks, then my neurologist ( ex) said it's a good sign and it's myokymia.
 
I'd rather have ultrasound than the stupid EMGs! At least ultrasounds aren't painful :/
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top