Literature DB >> 33436029

Leg muscle cross-sectional area measured by ultrasound is highly correlated with MRI.

Joshua K Sponbeck1, Clint R Frandsen1, Sarah T Ridge1, Derek A Swanson1, Dallin C Swanson1, A Wayne Johnson2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The leg muscles are important for balance, posture, and movement during static and dynamic activity. Obtaining cross-sectional area measurements (CSA) of the leg muscles helps researchers understand the health and force production capability of individual leg muscles. Therefore, having an easy to use and readily available method to assess leg muscle CSA is needed. Thus, the purpose of this study was to compare the magnitude, repeatability, and validity of CSA measurements of select leg muscles from ultrasound (US) and the current gold standard, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI).
METHODS: 20 healthy volunteers participated in this study. Each participant was imaged via US and MRI. The muscles of interest obtained on each participant consisted of the tibialis anterior at both 30 and 50% of the shank length, tibialis posterior at both 30 and 50% of the shank length, the flexor digitorum longus, the fibularis (peroneus) longus, and the fibularis (peroneus) brevis.
RESULTS: Strong Pearson correlations were seen for all of the muscles when comparing US to MRI with a range from .7840 to .9676. For all measurements, standard error of the measurement ranged from .003 to 0.260 cm2. Minimum detectable difference for muscle measurements ranged from .008 cm2 for MRI fibularis longus and fibularis brevis to .693 cm2 for MRI of tibialis anterior at 30%. US minimum detectable difference ranged from .125 cm2 for the tibialis posterior muscle at 30% to .449 cm2 for the tibialis anterior muscle at 50%.
CONCLUSIONS: Based on these results ultrasound is a valid method to obtain CSA of muscles of the leg when compared with MRI.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Cross-sectional area; Leg muscles; Magnetic resonance imaging; Ultrasound

Year:  2021        PMID: 33436029      PMCID: PMC7802339          DOI: 10.1186/s13047-021-00446-y

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Foot Ankle Res        ISSN: 1757-1146            Impact factor:   2.303


  21 in total

1.  Influence of complete spinal cord injury on skeletal muscle cross-sectional area within the first 6 months of injury.

Authors:  M J Castro; D F Apple; E A Hillegass; G A Dudley
Journal:  Eur J Appl Physiol Occup Physiol       Date:  1999-09

2.  Comparison of muscle sizes and moment arms of two rotator cuff muscles measured by ultrasonography and magnetic resonance imaging.

Authors:  B Juul-Kristensen; F Bojsen-Møller; E Holst; C Ekdahl
Journal:  Eur J Ultrasound       Date:  2000-06

3.  Measurement of human muscle volume using ultrasonography.

Authors:  Joseph I Esformes; Marco V Narici; Constantinos N Maganaris
Journal:  Eur J Appl Physiol       Date:  2002-03-27       Impact factor: 3.078

Review 4.  Computed tomography--an increasing source of radiation exposure.

Authors:  David J Brenner; Eric J Hall
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2007-11-29       Impact factor: 91.245

5.  Cadaver validation of skeletal muscle measurement by magnetic resonance imaging and computerized tomography.

Authors:  N Mitsiopoulos; R N Baumgartner; S B Heymsfield; W Lyons; D Gallagher; R Ross
Journal:  J Appl Physiol (1985)       Date:  1998-07

6.  Ultrasound imaging in rehabilitation.

Authors:  J Hides; C Richardson; G Jull; S Davies
Journal:  Aust J Physiother       Date:  1995

7.  Strength and cross-sectional area of human skeletal muscle.

Authors:  R J Maughan; J S Watson; J Weir
Journal:  J Physiol       Date:  1983-05       Impact factor: 5.182

8.  Reliability of ultrasound for measurement of selected foot structures.

Authors:  G Crofts; S Angin; K J Mickle; S Hill; C J Nester
Journal:  Gait Posture       Date:  2013-06-21       Impact factor: 2.840

9.  Use of diagnostic ultrasound for assessing muscle size.

Authors:  Michael G Bemben
Journal:  J Strength Cond Res       Date:  2002-02       Impact factor: 3.775

10.  Ultrasound imaging distinguishes between normal and weak muscle.

Authors:  Gloria Chi-Fishman; Jeanne E Hicks; Holly M Cintas; Barbara C Sonies; Lynn H Gerber
Journal:  Arch Phys Med Rehabil       Date:  2004-06       Impact factor: 3.966

View more
  3 in total

Review 1.  Human skeletal muscle size with ultrasound imaging: a comprehensive review.

Authors:  Masatoshi Naruse; Scott Trappe; Todd A Trappe
Journal:  J Appl Physiol (1985)       Date:  2022-03-31

2.  Intra-assessor reliability and measurement error of ultrasound measures for foot muscle morphology in older adults using a tablet-based ultrasound machine.

Authors:  Lydia Willemse; Eveline J M Wouters; Martijn F Pisters; Benedicte Vanwanseele
Journal:  J Foot Ankle Res       Date:  2022-01-25       Impact factor: 2.303

3.  Validity of ultrasound imaging for intrinsic foot muscle cross-sectional area measurements demonstrated by strong agreement with MRI.

Authors:  Dallin C Swanson; Joshua K Sponbeck; Derek A Swanson; Conner D Stevens; Steven P Allen; Ulrike H Mitchell; James D George; Aaron Wayne Johnson
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2022-02-14       Impact factor: 2.362

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.