| Literature DB >> 27315060 |
Ulrich Lindemann1, Christian Mohr1, Juergen Machann2,3, Konstantinos Blatzonis4, Kilian Rapp1, Clemens Becker1.
Abstract
The construct of sarcopenia is still discussed with regard to best appropriate measures of muscle volume and muscle function. The aim of this post-hoc analysis of a cross-sectional experimental study was to investigate and describe the hierarchy of the association between thigh muscle volume and measurements of functional performance in older women. Thigh muscle volume of 68 independently living older women (mean age 77.6 years) was measured via magnetic resonance imaging. Isometric strength was assessed for leg extension in a movement laboratory in sitting position with the knee flexed at 90° and for hand grip. Maximum and habitual gait speed was measured on an electronic walk way. Leg muscle power was measured during single leg push and during sit-to-stand performance. Thigh muscle volume was associated with sit-to-stand performance power (r = 0.628), leg push power (r = 0.550), isometric quadriceps strength (r = 0.442), hand grip strength (r = 0.367), fast gait speed (r = 0.291), habitual gait speed (r = 0.256), body mass index (r = 0.411) and age (r = -0.392). Muscle power showed the highest association with thigh muscle volume in healthy older women. Sit-to-stand performance power showed an even higher association with thigh muscle volume compared to single leg push power.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27315060 PMCID: PMC4912092 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0157885
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Fig 1Representative axial slice from the upper thigh with (a) original image, (b) total tissue in the cross section, (c) segmented lean tissue, i.e. skeletal muscle, (d) segmented adipose tissue.
Fig 2Linear encoder fixed at the person’s hip measuring the velocity of the hip as a function of time.
Descriptive data of all (n = 68) included women.
| Mean (SD) | Range | |
|---|---|---|
| 77.6 (4.99) | 70–89 | |
| 160 (6.26) | 145–173 | |
| 68.5 (11.88) | 44–102 | |
| 26.9 (4.17) | 17–38 | |
| 2.7 (1.68) | 0–6 | |
| 2.6 (3.06) | 0–10 | |
| 4021 (684.98) | 2768–5639 | |
| 2068 (351.62) | 1421–2960 | |
| 1953 (347.83) | 1346–2906 | |
| 727 (174.63) | 365–1161 | |
| 213 (73.08) | 123–464 | |
| 111 (38.61) | 47–232 | |
| 102 (36.70) | 48–235 | |
| 1.10 (0.22) | 0.49–1.54 | |
| 1.76 (0.34) | 0.73–2.39 | |
| 126 (33.39) | 56–232 | |
| 24.4 (4.12) | 15–33 |
BMI = Body Mass Index; Comorbidity assessed by the Functional Comorbidity Index; Cognition assessed by the Short Orientation Memory Concentration Test; better score values are underlined
Fig 3Association between thigh muscle volume of both legs with Sit-To-Stand performance power for all (n = 68) participating women, including a trend line (r = 0.628).
Association between total thigh muscle volume and parameters of functional performance described by Pearson´s coefficient of correlation.
| STS power | Power Rig (sum value) | Gait speed (maximum) | Gait speed (habitual) | Quadriceps strength | Hand grip strength | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0.628 | 0.550 | 0.291 | 0.256 | 0.442 | 0.367 | |
| 0.608 | 0.507 | 0.173 | 0.404 | 0.409 | ||
| 0.500 | 0.147 | 0.607 | 0.490 | |||
| 0.319 | 0.370 | 0.344 | ||||
| 0.172 | -0.142 | |||||
| 0.476 |