Abstract
We undertook a retrospective clinicopathologic study to ascertain the spectrum of histopathologic muscle biopsy changes in the elderly thought to have a myopathy, and to determine the accuracy of clinical diagnosis of myopathy in the elderly compared with a younger control population. We compared muscle histology and case histories, as well as EMG and creatine kinase (CK) data, obtained over 10 years from 77 consecutive patients aged 65 years or older (75 ± 6, x ± SD; group 1) with those from 104 patients aged 30 to 50 years (group 2). Prominent myopathic features were present in 42% (group 1) versus 51% (group 2) of all biopsies. Neurogenic changes (17% versus 9%, p < 0.04) and type II fiber atrophy (22% versus 6%, p < 0.0005) were more common in the elderly, whereas normal findings tended to be less frequent (19% versus 35%). In at least 68% of patients in both groups with the histologic diagnosis of myopathy, either the CK was elevated or the EMG was consistent with that diagnosis. Our study indicates that (1) the spectrum of histopathologic changes in the two groups differs because of a higher frequency of neurogenic change and type II atrophy in the elderly, and (2) the accuracy of clinical diagnosis of myopathy in the elderly approximates that in a younger population.
- © 1993 by the American Academy of Neurology
Letters: Rapid online correspondence
REQUIREMENTS
You must ensure that your Disclosures have been updated within the previous six months. Please go to our Submission Site to add or update your Disclosure information.
Your co-authors must send a completed Publishing Agreement Form to Neurology Staff (not necessary for the lead/corresponding author as the form below will suffice) before you upload your comment.
If you are responding to a comment that was written about an article you originally authored:
You (and co-authors) do not need to fill out forms or check disclosures as author forms are still valid
and apply to letter.
Submission specifications:
- Submissions must be < 200 words with < 5 references. Reference 1 must be the article on which you are commenting.
- Submissions should not have more than 5 authors. (Exception: original author replies can include all original authors of the article)
- Submit only on articles published within 6 months of issue date.
- Do not be redundant. Read any comments already posted on the article prior to submission.
- Submitted comments are subject to editing and editor review prior to posting.
