Abstract
BackgroundThe amount of muscle volume (MV) varies between individuals and is important for health, well-being and performance. Therefore, the monitoring of MV using different imaging modalities is important. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is considered the gold standard, but is not always easily accessible, and the examinations are expensive. Ultrasonography (US) is a much less expensive imaging method widely used to measure changes in muscle thickness (MT). Whether MT may translate into MV needs further investigation.PurposeThe aim of this review is to clarify whether US-derived equations based on MT predict MV based on MRI.MethodsA systematic literature review was conducted according to the PRISMA statement, searching the electronic databases PubMed, CINAHL and Web of Science, for currently published equations to estimate MV with US.ResultsThe literature search resulted in 363 citations. Twelve articles met the eligibility criteria. Ten articles scored eight out of eleven on QUADAS and two scored nine. Thirty-six prediction equations were identified. R values ranged between 0.53 and 0.961 and the standard error of the estimate (SEE) ranged between 6 and 12% for healthy adult populations, and up to 25.6% for children with cerebral palsy. Eight studies evaluated the results with a Bland–Altman plot and found no systematic errors. The overall strength and quality of the evidence was rated “low quality” as defined by the GRADE system.ConclusionsThe validity of US-derived equations based on MT is specific to the populations from which it is developed. The agreement with MV based on MRI is moderate with the SEE ranging between 6 and 12% in healthy adult populations. Suggestions for future research include investigations as to whether testing positions or increasing the number of measuring sites could improve the validity for prediction equations.
Highlights
The amount of muscle volume (MV) varies between individuals and is important for health, wellbeing and performance
The agreement with MV based on Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is moderate with the standard error of the estimate (SEE) ranging between 6 and 12% in healthy adult populations
All articles lacked the same items on the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS) score, and stated that it was unclear whether those who analysed the index test were blinded to the results of the reference test, and vice-versa
Summary
The amount of muscle volume (MV) varies between individuals and is important for health, wellbeing and performance. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is considered the gold standard, but is not always accessible, and the examinations are expensive. Ultrasonography (US) is a much less expensive imaging method widely used to measure changes in muscle thickness (MT). Its primary function is to generate force and create physical movement essential for everyday living, Liegnell et al BMC Med Imaging (2021) 21:106 to 50% of individuals above 65 years of age [3]. An increased or high amount of total MV seems to be protective and reduce the likelihood of common diseases and disabilities like cardiovascular disease, diabetes and immobility [6,7,8]. Quadriceps MV is predictive of patientreported function and persistent strength deficit after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction [12]
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
