0
Case Reports   |    
Streptococcal Necrotizing Myositis: The Role of Magnetic Resonance Imaging A Case Report
W. M. Tang, FRCS(Ed); J. W.K. Wong, FRCS(Ed); L. L.S. Wong, FRCR; J. C.Y. Leong, FRCS(Ed)
The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery.  2001; 83:1723-1726 
5 Recommendations (Recommend) | 3 Comments | Saved by 3 Users Save Case
Streptococcal necrotizing myositis is a rare but severe infection of skeletal muscle that is caused almost exclusively by Streptococcus pyogenes (Group-A streptococcus). The literature on this condition is sparse. In 1930, Abrami and Worms1 reported on two patients who died of this infection. Since then, fewer than thirty cases have been reported, to our knowledge2-9. Streptococcal necrotizing myositis has a much more sinister prognosis than do other bacterial infections of skeletal muscle, such as pyomyositis. The condition is difficult to diagnose; hence, treatment is often delayed, contributing to its associated high mortality rate.
We report a case of a five-year-old girl who survived streptococcal necrotizing myositis. A high index of suspicion combined with emergent magnetic resonance imaging facilitated early diagnosis and radical débridement of the necrotic muscles. The clinical and magnetic resonance imaging features of streptococcal necrotizing myositis are compared with those of pyomyositis.
 
Anchor for JumpAnchor for Jump
+Fig. 1:The left gluteus medius and gluteus minimus muscles were markedly swollen, with relative sparing of the gluteus maximus. Heterogeneous high-intensity signals within both muscles and stranding of the overlying subcutaneous soft tissues were shown on the T2-weighted fat-suppressed image.
 
Anchor for JumpAnchor for Jump
+Fig. 2:Heterogeneous contrast enhancement was seen within the gluteus medius and gluteus minimus on the T1-weighted fat-suppressed image, made after administration of gadolinium contrast medium. No effusion in the left hip joint was noted.
A five-year-old nondiabetic girl presented with a twenty-four-hour history of severe pain in the left hip and thigh following a single day of fever that had resolved spontaneously one week prior to admission. There was no recent history of injury or injection in the region of the left buttock, hip, or thigh; chicken pox; or steroid intake.
The patient was attached to a cardiac monitor, and blood pressure was checked every fifteen minutes. Although she was febrile (39.5°C) and dehydrated, her vital signs were initially stable (pulse, 120 bpm; blood pressure, 100/50 mm Hg). The pain in the left lower limb prevented walking, and muscle spasm markedly limited the range of motion of the hip. The hip could be flexed passively to only 20°; other directions of movement were virtually impossible. Although no abnormalities of the overlying skin were evident, the left hip and thigh were diffusely swollen, with exquisite tenderness without crepitus on deep palpation over the buttocks.
A conventional anteroposterior pelvic radiograph revealed marked soft-tissue swelling around the left hip but no soft-tissue gas. A diagnosis of infective myositis that was more likely to be streptococcal necrotizing myositis because of the toxic clinical presentation was made. The patient was prepared for surgery and an emergent magnetic resonance imaging scan. Blood was drawn for culture prior to administration of amoxicillin-clavulanate and clindamycin. Additional investigation revealed a white blood-cell count of 22.3 109/L (leukocytosis), a hemoglobin level of 120 g/L, and a platelet count of 321 109/L; both the erythrocyte sedimentation rate and the C-reactive protein level were elevated (to 80 mm/hr and 20 mg/L, respectively). The prothrombin time (16.6 sec), activated partial thromboplastin time (49.5 sec), and international normalized ratio (1.6) were all prolonged.
A magnetic resonance imaging scan, performed emergently within one hour after admission, demonstrated marked edema of the left gluteus medius and minimus muscles without associated articular or osseous abnormality (Figs. 1 and 2). Vital signs were monitored throughout the procedure, and they remained stable. General anesthesia was not required.
Following magnetic resonance imaging, the patient’s condition deteriorated and she became hypotensive (blood pressure, 70/30 mm Hg), requiring vasopressor support. Surgery was performed under general anesthesia within two hours after admission, through a lateral approach to the left hip. The gluteus maximus appeared normal, but the gluteus medius and gluteus minimus were grossly swollen and a dull red color. Normal contractility and capillary bleeding of these two muscles were absent. No abscess was found. A radical excision of the gluteus medius and gluteus minimus was performed. Neither arthrotomy nor aspiration of the left hip joint was performed as the hip had appeared normal on magnetic resonance imaging. Following débridement, the patient’s blood pressure improved slightly to 85/45 mm Hg, and she was transferred to the intensive-care unit, where she required ventilator and vasopressor support.
The blood pressure was maintained at 90/45 mm Hg during the first two postoperative days. Two days later, exploration was performed to determine whether repeat débridement was needed, but it revealed no additional tissue necrosis. The wound was closed in layers. Vasopressor support was gradually reduced and was finally discontinued on the fourth postoperative day. Also on that day, the patient’s temperature returned to normal and she was extubated. She was fully conscious, and she was able to tolerate an oral diet by the fifth postoperative day. The wound healed well, and the sutures were removed on the fourteenth day.
A pure growth of Streptococcus pyogenes that was sensitive to penicillin G and clindamycin grew on culture of muscle specimens and blood. Specimens obtained with swabs from the throat and nose of the patient and the other family members were negative for Streptococcus pyogenes. Histological examination of the excised muscles showed extensive tissue necrosis and heavy suppurative inflammation, mainly affecting the fibrous septa between the muscle bundles and in the fascial tissue.
In contrast to pyomyositis, an infection of skeletal muscle that is caused predominantly by Staphylococcus aureus and is associated with a mortality rate of <1%10,11, streptococcal necrotizing myositis is a rare but much more severe infection with a mortality rate between 50% and 100%2-9. Although in the literature this severe infection has usually been referred to as streptococcal myositis, we prefer the term streptococcal necrotizing myositis because extensive muscle necrosis is common, even in the early stages of the disease12.
Infective myositis, including streptococcal necrotizing myositis and pyomyositis, poses a diagnostic challenge to the clinician6. The symptoms and signs of myositis can be nonspecific and misleading, not clearly revealing the involvement of deep skeletal muscle. The skin overlying the infected muscles usually appears normal until a very late stage. This "silent" external appearance is in contrast to the severe pain and exquisite tenderness of the affected area. Pain that is out of proportion to the physical appearance has been typically described with this condition6,10,13. The clinical presentation may be confused with other conditions, such as septic arthritis and deep-vein thrombosis. In this five-year-old girl, the severe pain and tenderness, the global decrease in the range of motion of the left hip, and the diffuse soft-tissue swelling made a diagnosis of septic arthritis unlikely. These physical findings, together with the toxic appearance of the patient and the findings on the anteroposterior radiographs, resulted in the diagnosis of streptococcal necrotizing myositis.
It is important to differentiate streptococcal necrotizing myositis from pyomyositis because urgent surgical exploration can be lifesaving for the patient with streptococcal infection, whereas more conservative methods can be used for the patient with pyomyositis. Clinically, the early and rapid development of severe pain and tenderness is more suggestive of streptococcal necrotizing myositis. The rapid downhill course is in contrast to that seen in pyomyositis, which can take up to three weeks to progress from the initial "invasive stage" to the "late stage."10 The early development of toxic systemic involvement (streptococcal toxic-shock syndrome14) is typical of streptococcal necrotizing myositis. It is, however, important to note that children are able to compensate well initially but that their condition may suddenly deteriorate.
In the current case, the involvement of muscles was seen on the plain radiographs. To delineate the exact extent of muscle involvement, we performed an emergent magnetic resonance imaging scan. While other imaging techniques such as computed tomography and ultrasonography are more readily available and can provide similar information more quickly15, their smaller field of view does not give the surgeon as extensive a view of the infected area. The interpretation of ultrasound images is also more operator-dependent. Moreover, the use of a scanning probe on an exquisitely tender area is usually unacceptable to the patient, especially a child. The advantages of magnetic resonance imaging compared with computerized tomography include the ability to perform multiplanar imaging and to obtain better resolution and contrast in delineating soft-tissue lesions16,17.
The involvement of two adjacent muscles, seen on magnetic resonance imaging, is more suggestive of an infectious etiology than of other causes of myositis, such as hemorrhage or infarction. Magnetic resonance imaging also helps to differentiate streptococcal necrotizing myositis from pyomyositis. The magnetic resonance imaging criteria for the diagnosis of pyomyositis are well documented11. In our patient, the magnetic resonance imaging features of the involved glutei were different from those described for pyomyositis. Unlike in pyomyositis, liquefaction of the infected muscles to form an abscess is not a feature of streptococcal necrotizing myositis. The magnetic resonance imaging findings of pyomyositis, such as rim enhancement of the infected area on contrast-medium-enhanced T1-weighted images and high-signal-intensity fluid collection on T2-weighted images, are therefore absent on magnetic resonance images of streptococcal necrotizing myositis. Adjacent reactive joint effusion, another common finding on magnetic resonance images of patients with pyomyositis, was also absent in our patient, probably because of the much shorter duration of the disease process. The emergent magnetic resonance imaging also helped to exclude other diagnoses, especially septic arthritis. In the absence of magnetic resonance imaging, arthrocentesis might be required before the diagnosis of septic arthritis can be confidently excluded. During performance of this procedure, however, the virulent Streptococcus pyogenes might be introduced into the sterile hip joint.
A prompt and radical débridement is the key to the survival of a patient with streptococcal necrotizing myositis7. We recommend surgical exploration after the diagnosis has been made. The magnetic resonance imaging findings assisted us in achieving a complete, radical débridement; because they clearly showed that the left hip joint was not involved, exploration of the joint was deemed unnecessary. The extent of the débridement must be guided by both magnetic resonance imaging and intraoperative findings. The gluteus medius and gluteus minimus were found to be nonviable intraoperatively, thus confirming the extent of involvement seen on the magnetic resonance images. The first débridement was adequate, and no further muscle necrosis was noted during the second exploration. Therefore, magnetic resonance imaging provided a reliable "roadmap" and gave the surgeons a good mental picture for the débridement.
Despite the advantages of using magnetic resonance imaging in patients with this severe form of infection, we must stress that emergent magnetic resonance imaging may not be as readily and widely available as other imaging modalities. Moreover, magnetic resonance imaging usually takes more time than does ultrasound or computed tomography, and time is an important consideration with regard to this condition, especially if the patient is critically ill. If magnetic resonance imaging is performed, close monitoring of the patient’s vital signs is essential during the procedure.
In conclusion, we recommend that a high index of suspicion be maintained and a diagnosis of streptococcal necrotizing myositis be entertained for a patient with unexplained severe muscle pain and soft-tissue swelling accompanied by shock. The value of emergent magnetic resonance imaging, if it is readily available, is that it can confirm the clinical suspicion of myositis and exclude other diagnoses. It provides a reliable "roadmap" for débridement because it can clearly delineate the extent of the infection. Although no investigation can replace a high index of suspicion and repeated meticulous physical examination, emergent magnetic resonance imaging facilitated an early diagnosis and a thorough radical surgical débridement in our patient, both of which contributed to saving her life.
Abrami P,Worms P. Sur une forme particulière de septicemi a streptocoques: la myosite suraigue streptococcemique. Bull Soc Med Hop,1930;487-94: 487-94  1930 
 
Adams EM, Gudmundsson S, Yocum DE, Haselby RC, Craig WA,Sundstrom WR. Streptococcal myositis. Arch Intern Med,1985;145: 1020-3. 1451020  1985  [PubMed][CrossRef]
 
Boyle MF,Singer J. Necrotizing myositis and toxic strep syndrome in a pediatric patient. J Emerg Med,1992;10: 577-9. 10577  1992  [PubMed][CrossRef]
 
Hird B,Byrne K. Gangrenous streptococcal myositis: case report. J Trauma,1994;36: 589-91. 36589  1994  [PubMed][CrossRef]
 
Jansen JE,Retpen JA. Acute spontaneous streptococcal myositis. Case report. Acta Chir Scand,1988;154: 323-4. 154323  1988  [PubMed]
 
Kang N, Antonopoulos D,Khanna A. A case of streptococcal myositis (misdiagnosed as hamstring injury). J Accid Emerg Med,1998;15: 425-6. 15425  1998  [PubMed]
 
Marck KW, den Hollander H, Grond AJ,Veenendaal D. Survival after necrotising streptococcal myositis: a matter of hours. Eur J Surg,1996;162: 981-3. 162981  1996  [PubMed]
 
Nather A, Wong FY, Balasubramaniam P,Pang M. Streptococcal necrotizing myositis: a rare entity. A report of two cases. Clin Orthop,1987;215: 206-11. 215206  1987  [PubMed]
 
Schattner A, Hay E, Lifschitz-Mercer B, Gorbacz S,Bentwich Z. Fulminant streptococcal myositis. Ann Emerg Med,1989;18: 320-2. 18320  1989  [PubMed][CrossRef]
 
Chiedozi LC. Pyomyositis. Review of 205 cases in 112 patients. Am J Surg,1979;137: 255-9. 137255  1979  [PubMed][CrossRef]
 
Gordon BA, Martinez S,Collins AJ. Pyomyositis: characteristics at CT and MR imaging. Radiology,1995;197: 279-86. 197279  1995  [PubMed]
 
Stevens DL. Streptococcal toxic shock syndrome associated with necrotizing fasciitis. Annu Rev Med,2000;51: 271-88. 51271  2000  [PubMed][CrossRef]
 
Green RJ, Dafoe DC,Raffin TA. Necrotizing fasciitis. Chest,1996;110: 219-29. 110219  1996  [PubMed][CrossRef]
 
The Working Group on Severe Streptococcal Infections. Defining the group A streptococcal toxic shock syndrome. Rationale and consensus definition. JAMA,1993;269: 390-1. 269390  1993  [CrossRef]
 
Jacobson JA,van Holsbeeck MT. Musculoskeletal ultrasonography. Orthop Clin North Am,1998;29: 135-67. 29135  1998  [PubMed][CrossRef]
 
Kilcoyne RF, Richardson ML, Porter BA, Olson DO, Greenlee TK,Lanzer W. Magnetic resonance imaging of soft tissue masses. Clin Orthop,1988;228: 13-9. 22813  1988  [PubMed]
 
Murphy WA,Totty WG. Musculoskeletal magnetic resonance imaging. Magn Reson Annu,1986;1-35: 1-35  1986 
 

Submit a comment

Topics

Anchor for JumpAnchor for Jump
+Fig. 1:The left gluteus medius and gluteus minimus muscles were markedly swollen, with relative sparing of the gluteus maximus. Heterogeneous high-intensity signals within both muscles and stranding of the overlying subcutaneous soft tissues were shown on the T2-weighted fat-suppressed image.
Anchor for JumpAnchor for Jump
+Fig. 2:Heterogeneous contrast enhancement was seen within the gluteus medius and gluteus minimus on the T1-weighted fat-suppressed image, made after administration of gadolinium contrast medium. No effusion in the left hip joint was noted.
Abrami P,Worms P. Sur une forme particulière de septicemi a streptocoques: la myosite suraigue streptococcemique. Bull Soc Med Hop,1930;487-94: 487-94  1930 
 
Adams EM, Gudmundsson S, Yocum DE, Haselby RC, Craig WA,Sundstrom WR. Streptococcal myositis. Arch Intern Med,1985;145: 1020-3. 1451020  1985  [PubMed][CrossRef]
 
Boyle MF,Singer J. Necrotizing myositis and toxic strep syndrome in a pediatric patient. J Emerg Med,1992;10: 577-9. 10577  1992  [PubMed][CrossRef]
 
Hird B,Byrne K. Gangrenous streptococcal myositis: case report. J Trauma,1994;36: 589-91. 36589  1994  [PubMed][CrossRef]
 
Jansen JE,Retpen JA. Acute spontaneous streptococcal myositis. Case report. Acta Chir Scand,1988;154: 323-4. 154323  1988  [PubMed]
 
Kang N, Antonopoulos D,Khanna A. A case of streptococcal myositis (misdiagnosed as hamstring injury). J Accid Emerg Med,1998;15: 425-6. 15425  1998  [PubMed]
 
Marck KW, den Hollander H, Grond AJ,Veenendaal D. Survival after necrotising streptococcal myositis: a matter of hours. Eur J Surg,1996;162: 981-3. 162981  1996  [PubMed]
 
Nather A, Wong FY, Balasubramaniam P,Pang M. Streptococcal necrotizing myositis: a rare entity. A report of two cases. Clin Orthop,1987;215: 206-11. 215206  1987  [PubMed]
 
Schattner A, Hay E, Lifschitz-Mercer B, Gorbacz S,Bentwich Z. Fulminant streptococcal myositis. Ann Emerg Med,1989;18: 320-2. 18320  1989  [PubMed][CrossRef]
 
Chiedozi LC. Pyomyositis. Review of 205 cases in 112 patients. Am J Surg,1979;137: 255-9. 137255  1979  [PubMed][CrossRef]
 
Gordon BA, Martinez S,Collins AJ. Pyomyositis: characteristics at CT and MR imaging. Radiology,1995;197: 279-86. 197279  1995  [PubMed]
 
Stevens DL. Streptococcal toxic shock syndrome associated with necrotizing fasciitis. Annu Rev Med,2000;51: 271-88. 51271  2000  [PubMed][CrossRef]
 
Green RJ, Dafoe DC,Raffin TA. Necrotizing fasciitis. Chest,1996;110: 219-29. 110219  1996  [PubMed][CrossRef]
 
The Working Group on Severe Streptococcal Infections. Defining the group A streptococcal toxic shock syndrome. Rationale and consensus definition. JAMA,1993;269: 390-1. 269390  1993  [CrossRef]
 
Jacobson JA,van Holsbeeck MT. Musculoskeletal ultrasonography. Orthop Clin North Am,1998;29: 135-67. 29135  1998  [PubMed][CrossRef]
 
Kilcoyne RF, Richardson ML, Porter BA, Olson DO, Greenlee TK,Lanzer W. Magnetic resonance imaging of soft tissue masses. Clin Orthop,1988;228: 13-9. 22813  1988  [PubMed]
 
Murphy WA,Totty WG. Musculoskeletal magnetic resonance imaging. Magn Reson Annu,1986;1-35: 1-35  1986 
 
Accreditation Statement
These activities have been planned and implemented in accordance with the Essential Areas and policies of the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education (ACCME) through the joint sponsorship of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons and The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, Inc. The American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons is accredited by the ACCME to provide continuing medical education for physicians.
CME Activities Associated with This Article
Submit a Comment
Please read the other comments before you post yours. Contributors must reveal any conflict of interest.
Comments are moderated and will appear on the site at the discretion of JBJS editorial staff.

* = Required Field
(if multiple authors, separate names by comma)
Example: John Doe




Related Articles
Related Cases
Related Content
Topic Collections
Related Audio and Videos
PubMed Articles
Malignant necrotising streptococcal myositis: a rare and fatal condition.
The Journal of bone and joint surgery. British volume: Issue date- 2003 Mar
Clinical Trials
Readers of This Also Read...
jbjs jobs
12/22/2011
VA - Charleston Area Medical Center
12/22/2011
ME - Central Maine Medical Center
12/22/2011
Maine - Central Maine Medical Center