Cristina Caresio1, Filippo Molinari2, Giorgio Emanuel1, Marco Alessandro Minetto1. 1. Division of Endocrinology, Diabetology and Metabolism, Department of Medical Sciences, University of Turin, Turin, Italy. 2. Biolab, Department of Electronics and Telecommunications, Politecnico di Torino, Turin, Italy.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To assess the issue of muscle echo intensity reliability and to investigate the relationship between muscle echo intensity and size, shape and location of the region of interest (ROI) used for echo intensity quantification. METHODS: Ultrasonographic scans of the following five muscles were acquired in twenty healthy subjects: biceps brachii, rectus femoris, vastus lateralis, tibialis anterior and medial gastrocnemius. Muscle echo intensity was quantified in each scan. RESULTS: We found that the agreement between the different sized ROIs considered in each scan ranged from moderate (ICC: 0.54) to high (ICC: 0.86) and that the echo intensity consistency between equal sized ROIs of the three scans ranged from low (ICC: 0.42) to very high (0.91). The echo intensity of tibialis anterior and rectus femoris was different between different sized, shaped and located ROIs. The echo intensity of biceps brachii and tibialis anterior was higher than that of all other muscles, and females had higher echo intensity than males. Moreover, the muscle echo intensity was positively correlated with the subcutaneous layer thickness in three of five muscles. CONCLUSION: The echo intensity reliability was function of the ROI size. Muscle and gender variability in echo intensity was likely due to differences in fibrous and adipose tissue content and distribution. Possible explanations for the observed correlations between muscle echo intensity and subcutaneous layer thickness include the dependence of both variables on total body adiposity or the direct dependence of the extent of intramuscular fat on the amount of subcutaneous fat.
OBJECTIVE: To assess the issue of muscle echo intensity reliability and to investigate the relationship between muscle echo intensity and size, shape and location of the region of interest (ROI) used for echo intensity quantification. METHODS: Ultrasonographic scans of the following five muscles were acquired in twenty healthy subjects: biceps brachii, rectus femoris, vastus lateralis, tibialis anterior and medial gastrocnemius. Muscle echo intensity was quantified in each scan. RESULTS: We found that the agreement between the different sized ROIs considered in each scan ranged from moderate (ICC: 0.54) to high (ICC: 0.86) and that the echo intensity consistency between equal sized ROIs of the three scans ranged from low (ICC: 0.42) to very high (0.91). The echo intensity of tibialis anterior and rectus femoris was different between different sized, shaped and located ROIs. The echo intensity of biceps brachii and tibialis anterior was higher than that of all other muscles, and females had higher echo intensity than males. Moreover, the muscle echo intensity was positively correlated with the subcutaneous layer thickness in three of five muscles. CONCLUSION: The echo intensity reliability was function of the ROI size. Muscle and gender variability in echo intensity was likely due to differences in fibrous and adipose tissue content and distribution. Possible explanations for the observed correlations between muscle echo intensity and subcutaneous layer thickness include the dependence of both variables on total body adiposity or the direct dependence of the extent of intramuscular fat on the amount of subcutaneous fat.
Authors: Matt S Stock; Jacob A Mota; Ryan N DeFranco; Katherine A Grue; A Unique Jacobo; Eunhee Chung; Jordan R Moon; Jason M DeFreitas; Travis W Beck Journal: Eur J Appl Physiol Date: 2017-03-20 Impact factor: 3.078
Authors: Justin J Merrigan; Jason B White; Y Eliot Hu; Jason D Stone; Jonathan M Oliver; Margaret T Jones Journal: Eur J Appl Physiol Date: 2018-08-10 Impact factor: 3.078
Authors: M A Minetto; C Caresio; M Salvi; V D'Angelo; N E Gorji; F Molinari; G Arnaldi; S Kesari; E Arvat Journal: J Endocrinol Invest Date: 2018-11-15 Impact factor: 4.256
Authors: Dustin J Oranchuk; André R Nelson; Adam G Storey; Shelley N Diewald; John B Cronin Journal: Eur J Appl Physiol Date: 2020-09-29 Impact factor: 3.078