| Literature DB >> 32903666 |
Rosaly Correa-de-Araujo1, Odessa Addison2,3, Iva Miljkovic4, Bret H Goodpaster5, Bryan C Bergman6, Richard V Clark7, Joanne W Elena8, Karyn A Esser9, Luigi Ferrucci10, Michael O Harris-Love11,12, Steve B Kritchevsky13, Amanda Lorbergs14, John A Shepherd15, Gerald I Shulman16, Clifford J Rosen17.
Abstract
Skeletal muscle fat infiltration (known as myosteatosis) is an ectopic fat depot that increases with aging and is recognized to negatively correlate with muscle mass, strength, and mobility and disrupt metabolism (insulin resistance, diabetes). An interdisciplinary workshop convened by the National Institute on Aging Division of Geriatrics and Clinical Gerontology on September 2018, discussed myosteatosis in the context of skeletal muscle function deficit (SMFD). Its purpose was to gain a better understanding of the roles of myosteatosis in aging muscles and metabolic disease, particularly its potential determinants and clinical consequences, and ways of properly assessing it. Special attention was given to functional status and standardization of measures of body composition (including the value of D3-creatine dilution method) and imaging approaches [including ways to better use dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) through the shape and appearance modeling] to assess lean mass, sarcopenia, and myosteatosis. The workshop convened innovative new areas of scientific relevance to light such as the effect of circadian rhythms and clock disruption in skeletal muscle structure, function, metabolism, and potential contribution to increased myosteatosis. A muscle-bone interaction perspective compared mechanisms associated with myosteatosis and bone marrow adiposity. Potential preventive and therapeutic approaches highlighted ongoing work on physical activity, myostatin treatment, and calorie restriction. Myosteatosis' impact on cancer survivors raised new possibilities to identify its role and to engage in cross-disciplinary collaboration. A wide range of research opportunities and challenges in planning for the most appropriate study design, interpretation, and translation of findings into clinical practice were discussed and are presented here.Entities:
Keywords: aging; intermuscular adipose tissue; intramuscular adipose tissue; intramyocellular lipids; mobility-disability; muscle quality; myosteatosis; skeletal muscle function deficit
Year: 2020 PMID: 32903666 PMCID: PMC7438777 DOI: 10.3389/fphys.2020.00963
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Physiol ISSN: 1664-042X Impact factor: 4.566
Figure 1Schematic representation of potential determinants and clinical consequences of increases in myosteatosis with aging.
Advantages and disadvantages of imaging modalities in assessing myosteatosis.
| Advantages | Disadvantages | |
|---|---|---|
| Computed tomography (CT) |
Differentiates SAT and IMAT Axial and appendicular anatomic sites can be scanned Excellent reproducibility and reliability of muscle and adipose tissue attenuation Allows 3D reconstruction |
Cannot directly measure the location of fat storage or lipid droplets within muscle High cost Limited access Ionizing radiation Not portable |
| Peripheral quantitative computed tomography (pQCT) |
Differentiates SAT from intramuscular adipose and IMAT Quantifies muscle density Lower cost Limited ionizing radiation Portable device |
Axial and proximal appendicular anatomic sites cannot be scanned Individual muscle groups cannot be segmented Cannot distinguish between intramuscular fat and IMAT |
| Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) |
Muscle compartments can be segmented Differentiates SAT, intramuscular adipose, and IMAT High quality visualization of IMAT distribution Spectroscopy permits IMCL quantification |
Cannot measure muscle density High cost Limited access Not portable Cannot be used in individuals with metal implants Lack of standardized protocols for scan acquisition and adipose tissue quantification |
| Quantitative ultrasound (QUS) |
Reliable measures of muscle thickness and echogenicity Axial and appendicular anatomic sites can be scanned Lower cost No ionizing radiation Portable device |
Inter-machine validity unknown Consistency relies on probe placement, pressure, and angle of incidence Cannot distinguish between intramuscular fat and IMAT |
Figure 2MRI scans that illustrate two women with similar amounts of lean muscle mass, but differing amounts of myosteatosis. Previously published in Addison et al. (2014a).