Morphological and functional relationships with ultrasound measured muscle thickness of the upper extremity and trunk

Abstract

Unless a subject's muscle is relatively small, a single image from a standard ultrasound can only measure muscle thickness (MT). Thus, it is important to know whether MT is related to morphological and functional characteristics of individual muscles of the extremity and trunk. In this review, we summarize previously published articles in the upper extremity and trunk demonstrating the relationships between ultrasound-measured MT and muscle morphology (cross-sectional area, CSA and muscle volume, MV) and muscular or respiratory function. The linear relationship between MT and muscle CSA or MV has been observed in biceps brachii, triceps brachii, pectoralis major, psoas major, and supraspinatus muscles. Previous studies suggest that MT in the upper arm and trunk may reflect muscle CSA and MV for the individual muscles. Unfortunately, few studies exist regarding the functional relationship with ultrasound MT in the upper extremity and trunk. Future research is needed to investigate these findings further.

Age-related change in handgrip strength in men and women: is muscle quality a contributing factor?

“…The distance between the two interfaces was measured with a ruler. The precision and linearity of the image reconstruction have been confirmed and are described elsewhere (Abe et al 2014a). Test-retest reliability of MT-ulna measurements using the intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC 3,1 ), standard error of measurement (SEM), and the minimal difference needed to be considered real (Weir 2005) was previously determined for data from 23 young and middle-aged adults (13 men and 10 women) scanned twice 24 h apart: 0.994, 0.06 cm, and 0.17 cm, respectively.…”

Morphological and functional relationships with ultrasound measured muscle thickness of the lower extremity: a brief review

“…We recently reported the morphological and functional relationships with ultrasound measured MT of the upper extremity and trunk. 10 Thus, the purpose of this brief review was threefold. First, we discuss the validity and reliability of MT measurements in the thigh and lower leg muscles.…”

Prediction and validation of DXA-derived appendicular lean soft tissue mass by ultrasound in older adults

“…Ultrasound is a non-invasive, quick, and safe imaging technique that can be easily applied in clinical assessment and field survey. The precision and linearity of ultrasound image reconstruction have been confirmed (Abe et al 2014b). Thus, these newly developed equations could be a valuable tool in population-based studies to assess a criterion for defining age-related muscle loss (i.e., sarcopenia), although validation in other ethnic groups must be investigated in the future.…”

“…In addition, a study revealed that there are strong correlations (r = 0.95-0.99) between MRI-measured whole body and regional (thigh, lower-leg, arm, and trunk) muscle mass in men and women (Abe et al 2003). The linear relationship between MT and muscle CSA or muscle volume has been observed in upper and lower extremity muscles in both sexes (Abe et al 2014b). As a result, our newly developed equations mainly included MT from the extremities, as DXA-derived aLM does not include trunk muscle.…”

“…The distance between the two interfaces was measured with a ruler. Precision and linearity of the image reconstruction have been described and confirmed elsewhere [Abe et al 2014b]. Test-retest reliability of MT measurements using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC 3,1 ), standard error of measurement (SEM), and the minimal difference needed to be considered real was previously determined from young and middle-aged subjects for forearm radius (0.92, 0.10, and 0.27 cm) and ulna (0.99, 0.05, 0.15 cm) [Abe et al 2015a], anterior (0.88, 0.08, and 0.22 cm) and posterior (0.96, 0.08, and 0.22 cm) upper arm and anterior (0.98, 0.07, and 0.19 cm) and posterior (0.95, 0.10, and 0.28 cm) thigh [Abe et al 2014a].…”