Effects of low-intensity pulsed ultrasound on muscle thickness and echo intensity of the elbow flexors following exercise-induced muscle damage

Medeiros, Diulian Muniz; Mantovani, Rodrigo Freitas; Lima, Cláudia Silveira

doi:10.1007/s11332-017-0366-5

Cited by 8 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…brighter image) has been suggested to represent the accumulation of inflammatory cells between muscle fibers [12,31,70]. Since the infiltration of inflammatory cells is known to peak 3-4 days after a muscle damaging event, various studies have concluded that the increase in echo intensity during that time period allowed them to infer that echo intensity is a measurement of exercise-induced edema and inflammation [3,33,39,40].…”

Section: Muscle Damagementioning

confidence: 99%

“…A variety of imaging techniques are available for examining skeletal muscle components. Although not the same, the most popular methods include magnetic resonance imaging (considered the gold standard) [1], computed tomography [2], and ultrasonography [3,4]. Among these, ultrasonography is reported to be the most accessible, noninvasive, and practical method for imaging changes in muscle size [5,6].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Given this, there has been an increased use of ultrasound (i.e. brightness mode [B-mode] ultrasonography) in resistance exercise studies to quantify muscle size [3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10]. Ultrasound has also been used to quantify echo intensity [11][12][13], which is a variable that can be obtained from the same image used to assess skeletal muscle size.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Exercise induced changes in echo intensity within the muscle: a brief review

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Echo intensity is the mean pixel intensity of a specific region of interest from an ultrasound image. This variable has been increasingly used in the literature as a physiological marker. Although there has been an increased interest in reporting changes in echo intensity in response to exercise, little consensus exists as to what a change in echo intensity represents physiologically. The purpose of this paper is to review some of the earliest, as well as the most up to date literature regarding the changes in echo intensity in response to exercise. Echo intensity has been used to measure muscle quality, muscle damage, acute swelling, and intramuscular glycogen. The changes in echo intensity, however, are not consistent throughout the literature and often times lead to conclusions that seem contrary to the physiologic effects of exercise. For example, echo intensity increases in conjunction with increases in strength, contrary to what would be expected if echo intensity was a marker of muscle quality/muscle damage. It is conceivable that a change in echo intensity represents a range of physiologic effects at different time points. We recommend that these effects should be determined experimentally in order to rule out what echo intensity might and might not represent. Until this is done, caution should be employed when interpreting changes in echo intensity with acute and chronic exercise.

show abstract

Section: Muscle Damagementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Exercise induced changes in echo intensity within the muscle: a brief review

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Echogenicity, based on the pixel intensity quantification of an ultrasound image, could express different physiological views according to the literature and their study and utilization has increased in the last few years in order to provide a better understanding of ultrasound imaging analysis. Echointensity (EI) has been applied to the analysis of muscle strength in middle-aged and older adult populations [ 12 ], evaluating the muscle response to some types of exercise [ 13 , 14 ] or quantifying muscle size [ 15 , 16 ]. Moreover, EI has been considered a power biomarker for identifying the disruption of muscle structure in some degenerative muscle pathologies, for example lateral amyotrophic sclerosis [ 17 , 18 ] or muscle sarcopenia [ 19 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ultrasound Imaging Evaluation of Textural Features in Athletes with Soleus Pathology—A Novel Case-Control Study

De-la-Cruz-Torres

Navarro‐Flores

López‐López

et al. 2021

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: the aim of this study was to compare the echotexture of patients with soleus muscle injury and age matched controls. Methods: a sample of 62 athletes was recruited at the private clinic and was divided in two group: a healthy group (n=31) and a soleus pathology group whose athletes had soleus muscle injury, located in the central tendon (n=31). The muscle thickness (MTh), echointensity (EI) and echovariation (EV) were analyzed. An intra-rater reliability test (Intraclass Correlation Coefficient-ICC) was performed in order to analyze the reliability of the values of the measurements. Results: Sociodemographic variables did not show statistically significant differences (p > .05). Ultrasound imaging measurements who reported statistically significant differences were EI (p = .001) and standard deviation (SD) (p = 0.001). MTh and EV variables did not show statistically significant differences (p = .381 and p = .364, respectively). Moreover, reliability values for the MTh (ICC = .911), EI (ICC = .982), SD (ICC = .955) and EV (ICC = .963). Based on these results the intra-rater reliability was considered excellent. Conclusion: Athletes with a central tendon injury of soleus muscle showed a lower EI when they were compared to healthy athletes. The echogenicity showed by the quantitative ultrasound imaging measurement may be a more objective parameter for the diagnosis and follow-up the soleus muscle injuries.

show abstract

“…quality (Menezes et al, 2019), and pre-and post-exercise intramuscular glycogen (Nieman, et al, 2015). Medeiros et al (2017) measured EI at baseline, immediately post (0h), 24h, 48h, 72h and 96h following a rigorous elbow-flexor muscle damage protocol in 40 untrained young men. The authors observed a significant change in EI from pre-to post-exercise with EI peaking around 72 h post-exercise (Medeiros et al, 2017).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%