Purpose: Measurement of muscle mass is paramount in the screening and diagnosis of sarcopenia. Besides muscle quantity however, also quality assessment is important. Ultrasonography (US) has the advantage over dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) and bio-impedance analysis (BIA) to give both quantitative and qualitative information on muscle. However, before its use in clinical practice, several methodological aspects still need to be addressed. Both standardization in measurement techniques and the availability of reference values are currently lacking. This review aims to provide an evidence-based standardization of assessing appendicular muscle with the use of US. Methods: A systematic review was performed for ultrasonography to assess muscle in older people. Pubmed, SCOPUS and Web of Sciences were searched. All articles regarding the use of US in assessing appendicular muscle were used. Description of US-specific parameters and localization of the measurement were retrieved. Results: Through this process, five items of muscle assessment were identified in the evaluated articles: thickness, cross-sectional area, echogenicity, fascicle length and pennation angle. Different techniques for measurement and location of measurement used were noted, as also the different muscles in which this was evaluated. Then, a translation for a clinical setting in a standardized way was proposed. Conclusions: The results of this review provide thus an evidence base for an ultrasound protocol in the assessment of skeletal muscle. This standardization of measurements is the first step in creating conditions to further test the applicability of US for use on a large scale as a routine assessment and follow-up tool for appendicular muscle.
DOCUMENT
PURPOSE: In 2018, the SARCUS working group published a first article on the standardization of the use of ultrasound to assess muscle. Recommendations were made for patient positioning, system settings and components to be measured. Also, shortcomings in knowledge were mentioned. An important issue that still required standardization was the definition of anatomical landmarks for many muscles.METHODS: A systematic search was performed in Medline, SCOPUS and Web of Sciences looking for all articles describing the use of ultrasound in the assessment of muscle not described in the first recommendations, published from 01/01/2018 until 31/01/2020. All relevant terms used for older people, ultrasound and muscles were used.RESULTS: For 39 muscles, different approaches for ultrasound assessment were found that likely impact the values measured. Standardized anatomical landmarks and measuring points were proposed for all muscles/muscle groups. Besides the five already known muscle parameters (muscle thickness, cross-section area, pennation angle, fascicle length and echo-intensity), four new parameters are discussed (muscle volume, stiffness, contraction potential and microcirculation). The former SARCUS article recommendations are updated with this new information that includes new muscle groups.CONCLUSIONS: The emerging field of ultrasound assessment of muscle mass only highlights the need for a standardization of measurement technique. In this article, guidelines are updated and broadened to provide standardization instructions for a large number of muscles.
DOCUMENT
OBJECTIVES: Amplitude-mode (A-mode) ultrasonography is a promising technique to monitor loss and recovery of skeletal muscle in patients with burns. However, its clinimetric properties are unknown. Therefore, we determined its feasibility, interrater, and intrarater reliability, and clinical utility.METHODS: Skeletal muscle thickness of upper arms and legs was assessed longitudinally in hospitalized adult patients with ≥ 5 % total body surface area (TBSA) burns, by pairs of two out of five raters. Feasibility was evaluated by % successful assessments, reliability by intra-class correlation coefficients (ICCs), and clinical utility by smallest detectable change (SDC).RESULTS: Thirty-four patients participated (77 % male; mean age 48 ± 17 y, median TBSA burned 12 % [IQR 7-19]). Images were acquired on 69 % of planned occasions, and 89 % of images could be analyzed. Overall interrater ICCs were ≥ 0.84 (for pairs: 0.63-0.99) and intrarater ICCs were ≥ 0.95 (for pairs: 0.45-0.99). The overall interrater SDC was ≤ 33 % of the measured mean (for pairs: 3-52 %), while intrarater SDC was ≤ 20 % (for pairs: 3-48 %). All five raters could measure legs with moderate to excellent reliability, whereas for arms some demonstrated poor reliability.CONCLUSION: A-mode ultrasonography assessment of skeletal muscle in patients with burns is feasible. However, reliability and clinical utility are rater-dependent; therefore we recommend assessments by the same rater.
DOCUMENT
