The reliability and validity of ultrasound to quantify muscles in older adults: a systematic review

Willemke Nijholt, Aldo Scafoglieri, Harriët Jager-Wittenaar, Johannes S M Hobbelen, Cees P van der Schans, Willemke Nijholt, Aldo Scafoglieri, Harriët Jager-Wittenaar, Johannes S M Hobbelen, Cees P van der Schans

Abstract

This review evaluates the reliability and validity of ultrasound to quantify muscles in older adults. The databases PubMed, Cochrane, and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature were systematically searched for studies. In 17 studies, the reliability (n = 13) and validity (n = 8) of ultrasound to quantify muscles in community-dwelling older adults (≥60 years) or a clinical population were evaluated. Four out of 13 reliability studies investigated both intra-rater and inter-rater reliability. Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) scores for reliability ranged from -0.26 to 1.00. The highest ICC scores were found for the vastus lateralis, rectus femoris, upper arm anterior, and the trunk (ICC = 0.72 to 1.000). All included validity studies found ICC scores ranging from 0.92 to 0.999. Two studies describing the validity of ultrasound to predict lean body mass showed good validity as compared with dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (r2 = 0.92 to 0.96). This systematic review shows that ultrasound is a reliable and valid tool for the assessment of muscle size in older adults. More high-quality research is required to confirm these findings in both clinical and healthy populations. Furthermore, ultrasound assessment of small muscles needs further evaluation. Ultrasound to predict lean body mass is feasible; however, future research is required to validate prediction equations in older adults with varying function and health.

Keywords: Body composition; Muscles; Muscular atrophy; Sarcopenia; Ultrasonography.

© 2017 The Authors. Journal of Cachexia, Sarcopenia and Muscle published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of the Society on Sarcopenia, Cachexia and Wasting Disorders.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta‐analyses flowchart showing selection procedure.

References

    1. United Nations . Department of Economic and Social Affairs. Population Division (2015) 2015; World Population Ageing 2015 (ST/ESA/SER.A/390).
    1. Lauretani F, Russo CR, Bandinelli S, Bartali B, Cavazzini C, Di Iorio A, et al. Age‐associated changes in skeletal muscles and their effect on mobility: an operational diagnosis of sarcopenia. J Appl Physiol (1985) 2003;95:1851–1860.
    1. Hiona A, Leeuwenburgh C. The role of mitochondrial DNA mutations in aging and sarcopenia: implications for the mitochondrial vicious cycle theory of aging. Exp Gerontol 2008;43:24–33.
    1. Marcell TJ. Sarcopenia: causes, consequences, and preventions. J Gerontol A Biol Sci Med Sci 2003;58:M911–M916.
    1. Anton SD, Woods AJ, Ashizawa T, Barb D, Buford TW, Carter CS, et al. Successful aging: advancing the science of physical independence in older adults. Ageing Res Rev 2015;24:304–327.
    1. Rosenberg IH. Summary comments. Am J Clin Nutr 1989;50:1231–1233.
    1. Landi F, Cruz‐Jentoft AJ, Liperoti R, Russo A, Giovannini S, Tosato M, et al. Sarcopenia and mortality risk in frail older persons aged 80 years and older: results from ilSIRENTE study. Age Ageing 2013;42:203–209.
    1. Landi F, Calvani R, Cesari M, Tosato M, Martone AM, Bernabei R, et al. Sarcopenia as the biological substrate of physical frailty. Clin Geriatr Med 2015;31:367–374.
    1. Hirani V, Blyth F, Naganathan V, Le Couteur DG, Seibel MJ, Waite LM, et al. Sarcopenia is associated with incident disability, institutionalization, and mortality in community‐dwelling older men: the Concord Health and Ageing in Men Project. J Am Med Dir Assoc 2015;16:607–613.
    1. Rizzoli R, Reginster J, Arnal J, Bautmans I, Beaudart C, Bischoff‐Ferrari H, et al. Quality of life in sarcopenia and frailty. Calcif Tissue Int 2013;93:101–120.
    1. Cruz‐Jentoft AJ, Baeyens JP, Bauer JM, Boirie Y, Cederholm T, Landi F, et al. Sarcopenia: European consensus on definition and diagnosis: report of the European Working Group on Sarcopenia in Older People. Age Ageing 2010;39:412–423.
    1. Reijnierse EM, Trappenburg MC, Leter MJ, Blauw GJ, Sipila S, Sillanpaa E, et al. The impact of different diagnostic criteria on the prevalence of sarcopenia in healthy elderly participants and geriatric outpatients. Gerontology 2015;61:491–496.
    1. Mitsiopoulos N, Baumgartner RN, Heymsfield SB, Lyons W, Gallagher D, Ross R. Cadaver validation of skeletal muscle measurement by magnetic resonance imaging and computerized tomography. J Appl Physiol (1985) 1998;85:115–122.
    1. Sanada K, Kearns CF, Midorikawa T, Abe T. Prediction and validation of total and regional skeletal muscle mass by ultrasound in Japanese adults. Eur J Appl Physiol 2006;96:24–31.
    1. Crofts G, Angin S, Mickle KJ, Hill S, Nester C. Reliability of ultrasound for measurement of selected foot structures. Gait Posture 2014;39:35–39.
    1. Koppenhaver SL, Hebert JJ, Parent EC, Fritz JM. Rehabilitative ultrasound imaging is a valid measure of trunk muscle size and activation during most isometric sub‐maximal contractions: a systematic review. Australian Journal of Physiotherapy 2009;55:153–169.
    1. Pretorius A, Keating J. Validity of real time ultrasound for measuring skeletal muscle size. Physical Therapy Reviews 2008;13:415–426.
    1. English CK, Thoirs KA, Fisher L, McLennan H, Bernhardt J. Ultrasound is a reliable measure of muscle thickness in acute stroke patients, for some, but not all anatomical sites: a study of the intra‐rater reliability of muscle thickness measures in acute stroke patients. Ultrasound Med Biol 2012;38:368–376.
    1. Terwee CB, Mokkink LB, Knol DL, Ostelo RW, Bouter LM, de Vet HC. Rating the methodological quality in systematic reviews of studies on measurement properties: a scoring system for the COSMIN checklist. Qual Life Res 2012;21:651–657.
    1. Cohen J. A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educ Psychol Meas 1960;20:37–46.
    1. Fleiss JL, Levin B, Paik MC. Statistical Methods for Rates and Proportions, 2nd ed. New York: John Wiley & Sons; 1981. 38–46.
    1. Cho KH, Lee HJ, Lee WH. Reliability of rehabilitative ultrasound imaging for the medial gastrocnemius muscle in poststroke patients. Clin Physiol Funct Imaging 2014;34:26–31.
    1. Hammond K, Mampilly J, Laghi FA, Goyal A, Collins EG, McBurney C, et al. Validity and reliability of rectus femoris ultrasound measurements: comparison of curved‐array and linear‐array transducers. J Rehabil Res Dev 2014;51:1155–1164.
    1. MacGillivray TJ, Ross E, Simpson HA, Greig CA. 3D freehand ultrasound for in vivo determination of human skeletal muscle volume. Ultrasound Med Biol 2009;35:928–935.
    1. Sions JM, Velasco TO, Teyhen DS, Hicks GE. Ultrasound imaging: intraexaminer and interexaminer reliability for multifidus muscle thickness assessment in adults aged 60 to 85 years versus younger adults. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2014;44:425–434.
    1. Agyapong‐Badu S, Warner M, Samuel D, Narici M, Cooper C, Stokes M. Anterior thigh composition measured using ultrasound imaging to quantify relative thickness of muscle and non‐contractile tissue: a potential biomarker for musculoskeletal health. Physiol Meas 2014;35:2165–2176.
    1. Bemben MG. Use of diagnostic ultrasound for assessing muscle size. J Strength Cond Res 2002;16:103–108.
    1. Raj IS, Bird SR, Shield AJ. Reliability of ultrasonographic measurement of the architecture of the vastus lateralis and gastrocnemius medialis muscles in older adults. Clin Physiol Funct Imaging 2012;32:65–70.
    1. Reeves ND, Maganaris CN, Narici MV. Ultrasonographic assessment of human skeletal muscle size. Eur J Appl Physiol 2004;91:116–118.
    1. Stetts DM, Freund JE, Allison SC, Carpenter G. A rehabilitative ultrasound imaging investigation of lateral abdominal muscle thickness in healthy aging adults [corrected] [published erratum appears in J GERIATR PHYS THER 2009;32(3):110]. J Geriatr Phys Ther 2009;32:16–22.
    1. Strasser EM, Draskovits T, Praschak M, Quittan M, Graf A. Association between ultrasound measurements of muscle thickness, pennation angle, echogenicity and skeletal muscle strength in the elderly. Age 2013;35:2377–2388.
    1. Staehli S, Glatthorn JF, Casartelli N, Maffiuletti NA. Test–retest reliability of quadriceps muscle function outcomes in patients with knee osteoarthritis. J Electromyogr Kinesiol 2010;20:1058–1065.
    1. Thomaes T, Thomis M, Onkelinx S, Coudyzer W, Cornelissen V, Vanhees L. Reliability and validity of the ultrasound technique to measure the rectus femoris muscle diameter in older CAD‐patients. BMC Med Imaging 2012;12: 7‐2342‐12‐7.
    1. Strasser EM, Draskovits T, Praschak M, Quittan M, Graf A. Association between ultrasound measurements of muscle thickness, pennation angle, echogenicity and skeletal muscle strength in the elderly. Age 2013;35:2377–2388.
    1. English C, Fisher L, Thoirs K. Reliability of real‐time ultrasound for measuring skeletal muscle size in human limbs in vivo: a systematic review. Clin Rehabil 2012;26:934–944.
    1. Berger J, Bunout D, Barrera G, de la Maza MP, Henriquez S, Leiva L, et al. Rectus femoris (RF) ultrasound for the assessment of muscle mass in older people. Arch Gerontol Geriatr 2015;61:33–38.
    1. Sipila S, Suominen H. Muscle ultrasonography and computed tomography in elderly trained and untrained women. Muscle Nerve 1993;16:294–300.
    1. Takai Y, Ohta M, Akagi R, Kato E, Wakahara T, Kawakami Y, et al. Validity of ultrasound muscle thickness measurements for predicting leg skeletal muscle mass in healthy Japanese middle‐aged and older individuals. J Physiol Anthropol 2013;32, 12‐6805‐32‐12.
    1. Takai Y, Ohta M, Akagi R, Kato E, Wakahara T, Kawakami Y, et al. Applicability of ultrasound muscle thickness measurements for predicting fat‐free mass in elderly population. J Nutr Health Aging 2014;18:579–585.
    1. Mickle KJ, Nester CJ, Crofts G, Steele JR. Reliability of ultrasound to measure morphology of the toe flexor muscles. Journal of Foot And Ankle Research 2013;6:1.
    1. Abe T, Kawakami Y, Kondo M, Fukunaga T. Comparison of ultrasound‐measured age‐related, site‐specific muscle loss between healthy Japanese and German men. Clin Physiol Funct Imaging 2011;31:320–325.
    1. Miyatani M, Kanehisa H, Kuno S, Nishijima T, Fukunaga T. Validity of ultrasonograph muscle thickness measurements for estimating muscle volume of knee extensors in humans. Eur J Appl Physiol 2002;86:203–208.
    1. Atkinson G, Nevill AM. Statistical methods for assessing measurement error (reliability) in variables relevant to sports medicine. Sports Med 1998;26:217–238.
    1. Hopkins WG. Measures of reliability in sports medicine and science. Sports Med 2000;30:1–15.
    1. Rankin G, Stokes M. Reliability of assessment tools in rehabilitation: an illustration of appropriate statistical analyses. Clin Rehabil 1998;12:187–199.
    1. Weir JP. Quantifying test–retest reliability using the intraclass correlation coefficient and the SEM. J Strength Cond Res 2005;19:231–240.
    1. von Haehling S, Morley JE, Coats AJS, Anker SD. Ethical guidelines for publishing in the Journal of Cachexia, Sarcopenia and Muscle: update 2015. J Cachexia Sarcopenia Muscle 2015;6:315–316.

Source: PubMed

Sponsor e collaboratori

Condizioni mediche

Interventi farmacologici

3
Sottoscrivi