Literature DB >> 31762472

Echo intensity reliability between two rectus femoris probe sites.

Rodrigo Rabello1, Matias Fröhlich1, Aline Felicio Bueno1, Miriam Allein Zago Marcolino1, Thainá De Bona Bernardi1, Graciele Sbruzzi1, Marco Aurélio Vaz1.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: The ultrasound technique has been extensively used to measure echo intensity, with the goal of measuring muscle quality, muscle damage, or to detect neuromuscular disorders. However, it is not clear how reliable the technique is when comparing different days, raters, and analysts, or if the reliability is affected by the muscle site where the image is obtained from. The goal of this study was to compare the intra-rater, inter-rater, and inter-analyst reliability of ultrasound measurements obtained from two different sites at the rectus femoris muscle.
METHODS: Muscle echo intensity was quantified from ultrasound images acquired at 50% [RF50] and at 70% [RF70] of the thigh length in 32 healthy subjects.
RESULTS: Echo intensity values were higher (p = 0.0001) at RF50 (61.08 ± 12.04) compared to RF70 (57.32 ± 12.58). Reliability was high in both RF50 and RF70 for all comparisons: intra-rater (ICC = 0.89 and 0.94), inter-rater (ICC = 0.89 and 0.89), and inter-analyst (ICC = 0.98 and 0.99), respectively. However, there were differences (p < 0.05) between raters and analysts when obtaining/analyzing echo intensity values in both rectus femoris sites.
CONCLUSIONS: The differences in echo intensity values between positions suggest that rectus femoris's structure is not homogeneous, and therefore measurements from different muscle regions should not be used interchangeably. Both sites showed a high reliability, meaning that the measure is accurate if performed by the same experienced rater in different days, if performed by different experienced raters in the same day, and if analyzed by different well-trained analysts, regardless of the evaluated muscle site. © The British Medical Ultrasound Society 2019.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Intra-rater; grayscale analysis; inter-analyst; inter-rater; reproducibility

Year:  2019        PMID: 31762472      PMCID: PMC6851723          DOI: 10.1177/1742271X19853859

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ultrasound        ISSN: 1742-271X


  22 in total

1.  Reliability of the rectus femoris muscle cross-sectional area measurements by ultrasonography.

Authors:  Kelly M M e Lima; Thiago T da Matta; Liliam F de Oliveira
Journal:  Clin Physiol Funct Imaging       Date:  2012-01-24       Impact factor: 2.273

2.  Interobserver Reliability of Quantitative Muscle Sonographic Analysis in the Critically Ill Population.

Authors:  Aarti Sarwal; Selina M Parry; Michael J Berry; Fang-Chi Hsu; Marc T Lewis; Nicholas W Justus; Peter E Morris; Linda Denehy; Sue Berney; Sanjay Dhar; Michael S Cartwright
Journal:  J Ultrasound Med       Date:  2015-07       Impact factor: 2.153

3.  Reproducibility of ultrasound-derived muscle thickness and echo-intensity for the entire quadriceps femoris muscle.

Authors:  R Santos; P A S Armada-da-Silva
Journal:  Radiography (Lond)       Date:  2017-04-04

4.  Muscle echo intensity: reliability and conditioning factors.

Authors:  Cristina Caresio; Filippo Molinari; Giorgio Emanuel; Marco Alessandro Minetto
Journal:  Clin Physiol Funct Imaging       Date:  2014-06-05       Impact factor: 2.273

5.  Quantitative muscle ultrasound in Duchenne muscular dystrophy: a comparison of techniques.

Authors:  Irina Shklyar; Tom R Geisbush; Aleksandar S Mijialovic; Amy Pasternak; Basil T Darras; Jim S Wu; Seward B Rutkove; Craig M Zaidman
Journal:  Muscle Nerve       Date:  2014-12-23       Impact factor: 3.217

6.  Reliability of size and echo intensity of abdominal skeletal muscles using extended field-of-view ultrasound imaging.

Authors:  Noriko I Tanaka; Madoka Ogawa; Akito Yoshiko; Ryosuke Ando; Hiroshi Akima
Journal:  Eur J Appl Physiol       Date:  2017-09-14       Impact factor: 3.078

7.  Muscle compression improves reliability of ultrasound echo intensity.

Authors:  Anne J Pigula-Tresansky; Jim S Wu; Kush Kapur; Basil T Darras; Seward B Rutkove; Brian W Anthony
Journal:  Muscle Nerve       Date:  2017-09-30       Impact factor: 3.217

8.  Minimal training is required to reliably perform quantitative ultrasound of muscle.

Authors:  Craig M Zaidman; Jim S Wu; Sarah Wilder; Basil T Darras; Seward B Rutkove
Journal:  Muscle Nerve       Date:  2014-05-09       Impact factor: 3.217

Review 9.  Quantitative ultrasound: measurement considerations for the assessment of muscular dystrophy and sarcopenia.

Authors:  Michael O Harris-Love; Reza Monfaredi; Catheeja Ismail; Marc R Blackman; Kevin Cleary
Journal:  Front Aging Neurosci       Date:  2014-07-14       Impact factor: 5.750

10.  Ultrasound imaging in women's arm flexor muscles: intra-rater reliability of muscle thickness and echo intensity.

Authors:  Amilton Vieira; Angelina F Siqueira; João B Ferreira-Junior; Paulo Pereira; Dale Wagner; Martim Bottaro
Journal:  Braz J Phys Ther       Date:  2016-09-15       Impact factor: 3.377

View more
  2 in total

1.  Skeletal muscle analysis of panoramic ultrasound is reliable across multiple raters.

Authors:  Christopher J Cleary; Omid Nabavizadeh; Kaycie L Young; Ashley A Herda
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2022-05-02       Impact factor: 3.240

2.  Ultrasound Imaging Analysis of the Lumbar Multifidus Muscle Echo Intensity: Intra-Rater and Inter-Rater Reliability of a Novice and an Experienced Rater.

Authors:  Maryse Fortin; Brent Rosenstein; Jerome Levesque; Neil Nandlall
Journal:  Medicina (Kaunas)       Date:  2021-05-20       Impact factor: 2.430

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.