Next Article in Journal
Time to Total Knee Arthroplasty (TKA) Post Intra-Articular Injection
Previous Article in Journal
Advancements in Predictive Tools for Primary Graft Dysfunction in Liver Transplantation: A Comprehensive Review
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
JCM
Volume 13
Issue 13
10.3390/jcm13133763
jcm-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Prospective Study to Evaluate Rectus Femoris Muscle Ultrasound for Body Composition Analysis in Patients Undergoing Bariatric Surgery

by
Andreu Simó-Servat
1,*,
Montse Ibarra
1,
Mireia Libran
1,
Lilian Escobar
2,
Verónica Perea
1,
Carmen Quirós
1,
Carlos Puig-Jové
1 and
Maria-José Barahona
1,*
1
Department of Endocrinology and Nutrition, Hospital Universitari MútuaTerrassa, Plaça del Doctor Robert, 5, 08221 Terrassa, Spain
2
Department of General Surgery, Hospital Universitari MútuaTerrassa, 08221 Terrassa, Spain
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
J. Clin. Med. 2024, 13(13), 3763; https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm13133763
Submission received: 28 May 2024 / Revised: 20 June 2024 / Accepted: 22 June 2024 / Published: 27 June 2024
(This article belongs to the Section Endocrinology & Metabolism)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

Background: Bariatric surgery (BS) has a significant impact on body composition (BC) and consequently may affect established sarcopenic obesity (SO) in candidate patients. The aim of this study was to assess the utility of muscle ultrasound (MUS) of rectus femoris thickness (RFT) for the evaluation of BC and skeletal muscle function in patients undergoing BS compared to bioimpedance analysis (BIA), dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) and dynamometry. On the other hand, we aimed to demonstrate how MUS of RFT correlates with quality of life (QoL) in this population, likely due to its ability to detect regional quadriceps muscle sarcopenia compared to the other mentioned methods. Methods: This was a prospective pilot study that included 77 participants (64.9% female, mean age: 53.2 ± 8.67 years) who underwent BS. Handgrip strength was measured using a dynamometer, fat-free mass index (iFFM) was assessed by BIA, appendicular muscle index (AMI) was calculated using DEXA, and RFT was measured by MUS. Moreover, homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance (HOMA-IR) was calculated. All these measurements were conducted 1 month prior to BS and at the 12-month follow-up. QoL was assessed using the Moorehead–Ardelt questionnaire. Results: The mean BMI decreased by 12.95 ± 3.56 kg/m2 (p = 0.001). Firstly, we observed a positive correlation pre-surgery between HOMA and RFT (r = 0.27, p = 0.02), iFFM (r = 0.36, p = 0.001), AMI (r = 0.31, p = 0.01) and dynamometer readings (r = 0.26, p = 0.02). In addition, we found a correlation between RFT and iFFM (pre-surgery: r = 0.31, p = 0.01; post-surgery: r = 0.25, p = 0.05) and between RFT and lower-extremity AMI post-surgery (r = 0.27, p = 0.04). Secondly, we observed significant reductions in iFFM, AMI and RFT (p = 0.001), but not in dynamometer readings (p = 0.94). Finally, a tendency to a positive correlation between QoL questionnaire and RFT post-surgery results (r = 0.23, p = 0.079) was observed. Conclusions: Our results suggest that RFT measured by MUS is useful for evaluating SO and for the follow-up of these patients after BS. Moreover, RFT can provide relevant information about regional sarcopenia and probably has an accurate correlation with QoL in comparison with the other methods.

1. Introduction

Obesity, a chronic and recurrent condition, is experiencing a significant rise in prevalence globally, resulting in substantial healthcare costs associated with its related comorbidities [1,2,3]. Currently, body mass index (BMI) continues to serve as a categorical diagnostic measure for obesity. However, BMI has notable drawbacks as it does not offer insights into body composition (BC) or the metabolic status of individuals [4,5]. Thus, new methods, such as muscle ultrasound (MUS), should be introduced into clinical practice to assess the BC of patients with obesity, especially if they are candidates for bariatric surgery (BS), since weight loss caused by BS leads to changes in BC. BS is one of the most effective options for weight loss in patients with obesity, as well as for controlling related comorbidities, especially metabolic diseases. Patients with obesity may be at high risk of developing sarcopenia, a condition known as sarcopenic obesity (SO), as well as an elevation in homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance (HOMA-IR). Even with weight reduction, sarcopenia can continue in patients after BS [6,7,8]. This loss of muscle mass has been associated with lower psychological health and quality of life (QoL) and higher prevalence of type 2 diabetes [9,10]. Thus, the maintenance of muscle mass during weight loss following BS holds clinical significance [11]. However, BC assessment methods are often overlooked in daily clinical practice for managing obesity due to the absence of straightforward and reliable tests. Dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) has traditionally been regarded as a reference technique, quantifying the mass of various tissues in kilograms [12]. Nonetheless, DEXA lacks the ability to provide information about specific muscle groups, and thus fails to address regional sarcopenia. Additionally, access to DEXA is limited in many clinics, and it is not routinely performed except for bone density assessment [5,13,14]. Among the numerous methods available for assessing muscle mass, MUS is becoming increasingly recognized as a valuable tool in clinical settings, being a simple, real-time, noninvasive, radiation-free, low-cost and easily transportable technique. Clinical trials are currently underway to investigate the use of MUS for diagnosing sarcopenia [15,16], but there is insufficient research on its effectiveness in diagnosing SO and assessing changes in lean mass following BS [17,18]. In this context, MUS could be used as an alternative or complementary method to traditional bioimpedance analysis (BIA) or DEXA [19]. In addition, MUS could distinguish regional sarcopenia, such as rectus femoral thickness (RFT) of quadriceps muscle. This muscle group plays a crucial role in the performance of fundamental tasks necessary for an individual’s autonomy, as it is indispensable for walking [20] and consequently for QoL [17].
On this basis, the present study was designed with the following objectives: (a) to assess the correlations and changes pre- and post-BS between RFT measured by MUS and other methods (BIA and DEXA), with the aim of validating MUS as a valuable tool for evaluating BC and regional sarcopenia; (b) to establish the correlation between body composition assessment methods, including MUS, and HOMA-IR, a well-established biomarker of diabetes and sarcopenia; (c) to determine the value of the different methods (MUS, BIA, DEXA and dynamometry) in assessing QoL before and after BS.

2. Materials and Methods

We performed a prospective observational study in our hospital (University Hospital Mutua de Terrassa). Participants were recruited from the outpatient Obesity Unit between January 2020 and February 2022. Participants were candidates for BS whose BMI was higher than 35 kg/m2 and who had comorbidities or candidates who had a BMI > 40 kg/m2. The study followed the STROBE guidelines for prospective studies [21]. The exclusion criteria were as follows: age ≥ 65 years; pregnancy; patients with clinical or personal characteristics that make monitoring difficult, including drug or alcohol addiction and severe psychological or psychiatric disorders. Initially, we conducted an analysis of the HOMA-IR (glucose and insulin) results for all patients before surgery. Subsequently, handgrip strength was assessed using a dynamometer, while BIA was employed to determine the fat-free mass index (iFFM). The appendicular muscle index (AMI) was calculated by DEXA, and RFT was measured using ultrasound. These assessments, along with HOMA-IR, were conducted one month prior to surgery and during the 12-month follow-up period to study changes in body composition. Additionally, QoL was evaluated using the Moorehead–Ardelt questionnaire both before and after BS. The Hospital’s Ethics Committee approved all the procedures carried out in the study, and all participants signed their informed consent before their inclusion in the study.
The BodyStat® 1500 MDD model was used for BIA, as previously described [17,22]. RFT measurements were made with a sonographic US Logiq P9 (GE Healthcare) equipment muscle-skeleton B-model using a linear multifrequency transducer (4–11 Hz) with adequate use of contact gel and minimal pressure to avoid excessive compression of the muscle. Patient positioning was carried out in accordance with reports in the literature (Figure 1) [17,22,23,24,25,26,27]. The patient lay stretched out on the examination table with legs extended and relaxed. Measurements of the RF were taken at 2/3 of the distance from the iliac spine and 1/3 of the distance from the tendon insertion on the patella.
Sarcopenia predominantly impacts the lower limbs; therefore, RFT was specifically selected [28] for evaluation. Its assessment via ultrasound followed the guidelines set forth by the European Union Geriatric Medicine Society Sarcopenia Special Interest Group and aligned with previous studies in the literature [19]. Three consecutive measurements were conducted, and the average value was recorded. The data were expressed in centimeters (cm) as means ± standard deviations. To minimize interindividual variability, all measurements were performed by the same physician (the endocrinologist A.S-S), who had 5 years of experience. Intra-observer reliability was assessed by evaluating intraclass correlation coefficients (CVs) using three images captured on three different days, yielding a CV of 0.94 for RFT.

Statistical Analysis

We utilized STATA statistical software version 14 (College Station, TX, USA) for our analysis. Continuous variables are presented as means ± standard deviations (SDs), unless otherwise stated, while categorical variables are presented as percentages. t-tests were employed to compare continuous variables between groups, Fisher’s test was employed for categorical variables, and Pearson’s correlation test was employed to examine relationships between variables. All analyses were two-tailed, with statistical significance set at p < 0.05.

3. Results

The general information of the participants is presented in Table 1. A total of 77 individuals were involved: 50 were females (64.9%), with an average age of 53.2 ± 8.67 years. The average initial BMI was 43.82 ± 5.08 kg/m2 and decreased by 12.95 ± 3.56 kg/m2 (p = 0.001).
Regarding the correlations, firstly, we found a positive correlation pre-surgery between HOMA-IR and RFT (r = 0.27, p = 0.02), iFFM (r = 0.36, p = 0.001), AMI (r = 0.31, p = 0.01) and dynamometer readings (r = 0.26, p = 0.02) (Figure 2).
Secondly, we determined a positive correlation between RFT and iFFM (pre-surgery: r = 0.31, p = 0.01; post-surgery: r = 0.25, p = 0.05) (Figure 3a) and between RFT and lower-extremity AMI post-surgery (pre-surgery: r = 0.15, p = 0.26; post-surgery: r = 0.27, p = 0.04) (Figure 3b). A significant shift in the correlation pattern between the QoL questionnaire and RFT results was observed pre- and post-surgery. Prior to surgery, a negligible negative correlation was noted (r = −0.0018, p = 0.98), while post-surgery, the correlation turned positive (r = 0.23, p = 0.079), albeit not reaching statistical significance (Figure 3c). Conversely, correlations between the QoL questionnaire results and iFFM (pre-surgery: r = 0.09, p = 0.4; post-surgery: r = 0.0024, p = 0.1) and AMI (pre-surgery: r = 0.11, p = 0.4; post-surgery: r = 0.09, p = 0.5) remained weak and consistently positive, albeit not statistically significant. Furthermore, no significant correlation was found between the QoL questionnaire and handgrip strength results pre- or post-surgery (pre-surgery: r = 0.14, p = 0.22; post-surgery: r = 0.12, p = 0.3). These results underscore the unique influence of BS on the relationship between QoL and RFT, diverging from the patterns observed with other BC measures.
The anthropometric parameters assessed by BIA (iFFM), DEXA (AMI) and MUS (RFT) are displayed in Table 2. We found significant reductions in RTF (1.05 ± 0.067 vs. 0.77 ± 0.03, p = 0.0002), iFFM (23.79 ± 0.38 vs. 21.07 ± 0.59, p = 0.001), AMI (7.99 ± 0.18 vs. 7.16 ± 0.14, p = 0.001) and lower-extremity AMI (6.02 ± 0.12 vs. 5.39 ± 0.11, p = 0.001). However, there were no statistically significant differences regarding grip strength measured by dynamometry (29.33 ± 1.26 vs. 29.38 ± 1.29, p = 0.94). On the other hand, significant statistical differences were found when comparing the QoL test results before and after surgery (w0: 2.92, p = 0.001).
Delving deeper into the obtained results, it was found that six patients within the total sample experienced an increase in RFT, despite the statistically significant overall reduction. It is noteworthy that QoL test scores increased considerably for all six of them (Table 3).

4. Discussion

In the present study, changes in BC were evaluated in patients who underwent BS at baseline and after 12-month follow-up. The results showed statistically significant decreases in RFT, iFFM and AMI, but not in handgrip strength, confirming what has been described previously in the literature [29,30], and that MUS is another valid tool for the study of BC. Furthermore, we demonstrated a good correlation pre-BS between HOMA-IR and RFT, iFMM and AMI, which shows that imaging methods, including MUS of RFT, can predict SO in these patients, since insulin resistance is a predictive factor for muscle deterioration and diabetes. Moreover, to validate MUS as a useful tool, we established a good correlation between pre- and post-BS using US and BIA for assessing BC. These good correlations were observed between RFT and lower-extremity AMI only post-surgery, thus supporting the value of US in assessing the follow-up of these patients after BS. The lack of a pre-BS correlation between MUS and DEXA may be attributed to the sample size and the diminished precision in patients with obesity, characterized by a significant adipose tissue layer overlying muscle tissue and hyperhydration.
On the other hand, our study supports the knowledge that sarcopenia is first affected in the lower extremities rather than the upper ones, as no differences were detected in grip strength measured by dynamometry [31,32]. Our study population was under 65 years old and without a history of serious musculoskeletal pathologies, indicating a good health status without functional limitations of the upper limbs or, consequently, normal grip strength. In our sample, obesity resulted in reduced mobility and less walking in the patients, which could explain a greater tendency towards sarcopenia in the lower limbs.
When analyzing the relationship between the methods employed and QoL, we observed a slight negative correlation between RFT and pre-surgery QoL. This suggests that higher muscle mass is associated with lower QoL, likely due to its correlation with higher obesity levels in patients. However, following BS, this relationship was reversed, indicating a positive correlation between RFT and QoL post-BS. This shift implies that increased muscle mass corresponds to improved QoL, as patients do not maintain obese status post-BS. Interestingly, this reversal of correlation was not evident with the parameters analyzed, nor with BIA or DEXA. This underscores the complex interplay between BC changes and QoL outcomes following BS, suggesting a need for further investigation into the underlying mechanisms driving these associations. These results led us to consider that MUS of RFT may be more useful and complementary for monitoring patients undergoing BS, as the quadriceps alone is a strong indicator of possible regional sarcopenia and autonomy [33,34]. Therefore, patients could improve their QoL even if their total lean mass does not show improvement by BIA, since the improvement of the quadriceps can allow patient autonomy. In fact, we detected six patients out of the total sample who exhibited an increase in RFT despite the overall statistically significant decrease. Specifically, in these six patients, QoL questionnaire scores increased substantially.
This prospective study demonstrates that the BC changes resulting from BS are significant and can be accurately assessed using MUS. So, incorporating MUS into BC assessments for individuals being considered for BS offers a more comprehensive understanding of post-intervention BC. Currently, BC evaluations are not systematically conducted in many centres, likely due to resource constraints. Methods such as DEXA, CT and MRI are not only costly and difficult to access but also involve radiation exposure. In contrast, MUS is becoming more readily available in clinics and could serve as a valuable tool for assessing BC or even screening for SO. Since MUS can provide localized information about muscle groups, it can complement the other accessible methods, such as BIA and dynamometry, which assess functional aspects. In summary, our findings suggest the need for further investigation into the utility of MUS in this context and the establishment of specific criteria as cut-off points for diagnosing regional sarcopenia.
The primary constraint in our study was the absence of a control group comprising individuals without obesity. However, our study was designed to assess post-BS progression, with patients serving as their own reference points [35]. Moreover, changes in BC may be exaggerated or underestimated by inadequate control of confounders, such as physical activity or other life habits [36]. The drawbacks associated with MUS primarily stem from the absence of standardized procedures and its heavy reliance on the proficiency and capabilities of the operator [37]. The ability to interpret muscle–fat interfaces is constrained by the similarity in acoustic impedance between muscle and fat tissues. Additionally, an operator using ultrasound may inadvertently introduce measurement errors by applying excessive pressure with the transducer onto the skin, potentially compressing the muscle tissue [38]. Furthermore, we lacked data regarding quadriceps muscle function. Nonetheless, considering the significance of the quadriceps in mobility assessments, measurements of RFT offer a valuable proxy for strength [39,40,41]. All measurements were conducted by the same physician, which limited the reproducibility of the test.
To sum up, the measurements acquired from MUS of RFT represent novel and readily accessible parameters that we can incorporate into clinical practice to enhance the assessment of BC. Specifically, morphological features derived from MUS measurements of the quadriceps muscle could serve as a tool for screening and initial assessment of SO in individuals considering BS, particularly in their postoperative monitoring. This strategy will provide us with fresh perspectives on the potential benefits of MUS [22].

5. Conclusions

Our results suggest that MUS of RFT can complement BIA and DEXA for evaluating and monitoring BC in patients who have undergone BS. Moreover, RFT, like other methods used to study BC, correlates with HOMA levels pre-BS, highlighting the relationship between obesity, sarcopenia and diabetes. In addition, MUS of RFT might be more closely associated with QoL than other methods. It is also a more accessible, noninvasive and cost-effective tool that could provide valuable insights into quadriceps sarcopenia for monitoring this patient population.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, A.S.-S. and M.-J.B.; methodology A.S.-S., L.E., M.I. and M.L.; validation, M.-J.B. and V.P.; formal analysis, A.S.-S., C.P.-J., V.P. and M.-J.B.; investigation, A.S.-S., C.Q. and M.-J.B.; writing-original draft preparation, A.S.-S. and M.-J.B.; writing—review and editing, A.S.-S. and M.-J.B. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by the Fundació Docència i Recerca MútuaTerrassa (exp. P12/2018).

Institutional Review Board Statement

The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and approved by the Ethics Committee of University Hospital MutuaTerrassa (Spain) (EO1938) on 19 December 2018.

Informed Consent Statement

Informed consent was obtained from all participants involved in the study. Written informed consent to publish this paper was obtained from the patients.

Data Availability Statement

Data are contained within the article.

Acknowledgments

The authors wish to express their gratitude to Patricia Vigués for language editing and proofreading of the manuscript.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Jayedi, A.; Soltani, S.; Motlagh, S.Z.T.; Emadi, A.; Shahinfar, H.; Moosavi, H.; Shab-Bidar, S. Anthropometric and adiposity indicators and risk of type 2 diabetes: Systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis of cohort studies. BMJ 2022, 376, e067516. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Di Angelantonio, E.; Bhupathiraju, S.N.; Wormser, D.; Gao, P.; Kaptoge, S.; de Gonzalez, A.B.; Cairns, B.J.; Huxley, R.; Jackson, C.L.; Joshy, G.; et al. Body-mass index and all-cause mortality: Individual-participant-data metaanalysis of 239 prospective studies in four continents. Lancet 2016, 388, 776–786. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Blüher, M. Obesity: Global epidemiology and pathogenesis. Nat. Rev. Endocrinol. 2019, 15, 288–298. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. Gómez-Ambrosi, J.; Silva, C.; Galofré, J.C.; Escalada, J.; Santos, S.; Millán, D.; Vila, N.; Ibañez, P.; Gil, M.J.; Valentí, V.; et al. Body mass index classification misses subjects with increased cardiometabolic risk factors related to elevated adiposity. Int. J. Obes. 2012, 36, 286–294. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Palmas, F.; Ciudin, A.; Guerra, R.; Eiroa, D.; Espinet, C.; Roson, N.; Burgos, R.; Simo, R. Comparison of computed tomography and dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry in the evaluation of body composition in patients with obesity. Front. Endocrinol. 2023, 14, 1161116. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Kim, G.; Tan, C.S.; Tan, K.W.; Lim, S.P.Y.; So, J.B.Y.; Shabbir, A. Sleeve gastrectomy and roux-en-Y gastric bypass lead to comparable changes in body composition in a multiethnic Asian population. J. Gastrointest. Surg. 2019, 23, 445–450. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  7. Matos, O.; Ruthes, E.M.P.; Malinowski, A.K.C.; Lima, A.L.; Veiga, M.S.; Krause, M.P.; Farah, L.; Souza, C.J.F.; Lass, A.D.; Castelo-Branco, C. Changes in bone mass and body composition after bariatric surgery. Gynecol. Endocrinol. 2020, 36, 578–581. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Baad, V.M.A.; Bezerra, L.R.; de Holanda, N.C.P.; dos Santos, A.C.O.; da Silva, A.A.M.; Bandeira, F.; Cavalcante, T.C.F. Body Composition, Sarcopenia and Physical Performance After Bariatric Surgery: Differences Between Sleeve Gastrectomy and Roux-En-Y Gastric Bypass. Obes. Surg. 2022, 32, 3830–3838. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  9. Cho, Y.; Shin, S.Y.; Shin, M.J. Sarcopenic obesity is associated with lower indicators of psychological health and quality of life in Koreans. Nutr. Res. 2015, 35, 384–392. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Tian, S.; Xu, Y. Association of sarcopenic obesity with the risk of all-cause mortality: A meta-analysis of prospective cohort studies. Geriatr. Gerontol. Int. 2016, 16, 155–166. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Sizoo, D.; de Heide, L.J.; Emous, M.; van Zutphen, T.; Navis, G.; van Beek, A.P. Measuring Muscle Mass and Strength in Obesity: A Review of Various Methods. Obes. Surg. 2021, 31, 384–393. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  12. Cruz-Jentoft, A.J.; Bahat, G.; Bauer, J.; Boirie, Y.; Bruyère, O.; Cederholm, T.; Cooper, C.; Landi, F.; Rolland, Y.; Sayer, A.A.; et al. Sarcopenia: Revised European consensus on definition and diagnosis. Age Ageing 2019, 48, 16–31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Gupta, N.; Balasekaran, G.; Victor Govindaswamy, V.; Yong Hwa, C.; Meng Shun, L. Comparison of body composition with bioelectric impedance (BIA) and dual energy Xray absorptiometry (DEXA) among Singapore Chinese. J. Sci. Med. Sport 2011, 14, 33–35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Toombs, R.J.; Ducher, G.; Shepherd, J.A.; De Souza, M.J. The impact of recent technological advances on the trueness and precision of DXA to assess body composition. Obesity 2012, 20, 30–39. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. Pineau, J.C.; Guihard-Costa, A.M.; Bocquet, M. Validation of ultrasound techniques applied to body fat measurement. A comparison between ultrasound techniques, air displacement plethysmography and bioelectrical impedance vs. dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry. Ann. Nutr. Metab. 2007, 51, 421–427. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Ticinesi, A.; Narici, M.V.; Lauretani, F.; Nouvenne, A.; Colizzi, E.; Mantovani, M.; Corsonello, A.; Landi, F.; Meschi, T.; Maggio, M. Assessing sarcopenia with vastus lateralis muscle ultrasound: An operative protocol. Aging Clin. Exp. Res. 2018, 30, 1437–1443. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Simó-Servat, A.; Ibarra, M.; Libran, M.; Quirós, C.; Puértolas, N.; Alonso, N.; Perea, V.; Simó, R.; Barahona, M. Usefulness of Ultrasound in Assessing the Impact of Bariatric Surgery on Body Composition: A Pilot Study. Obes. Surg. 2023, 33, 1211–1217. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Deniz, O.; Cruz-Jentoft, A.; Sengul Aycicek, G.; Unsal, P.; Esme, M.; Ucar, Y.; Burkuk, S.; Sendur, A.; Yavuz, B.B.; Cankurtaran, M.; et al. Role of Ultrasonography in Estimating Muscle Mass in Sarcopenic Obesity. J. Parenter. Enter. Nutr. 2020, 44, 1398–1406. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Ido, A.; Nakayama, Y.; Ishii, K.; Iemitsu, M.; Sato, K.; Fujimoto, M.; Kurihara, T.; Hamaoka, T.; Satoh-Asahara, N.; Sanada, K. Ultrasound-Derived Abdominal Muscle Thickness Better Detects Metabolic Syndrome Risk in Obese Patients tan Skeletal Muscle Index Measured by Dual-Energy X-ray Absorptiometry. PLoS ONE 2015, 10, e0143858. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  20. Perkisas, S.; Bastijns, S.; Baudry, S.; Bauer, J.; Beaudart, C.; Beckwée, D.; Cruz-Jentoft, A.; Gasowski, J.; Hobbelen, H.; Jager-Wittenaar, H.; et al. Application of ultrasound for muscle assessment in sarcopenia: 2020 SARCUS update. Eur. Geriatr. Med. 2021, 12, 45–59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Von Elm, E.; Altman, D.G.; Egger, M.; Pocock, S.J.; Gøtzsche, P.C.; Vandenbroucke, J.P. STROBE Initiative. The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: Guidelines for reporting observational studies. Lancet 2007, 370, 1453–1457. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  22. Simó-Servat, A.; Ibarra, M.; Libran, M.; Rodríguez, S.; Perea, V.; Quirós, C.; Orois, A.; Pérez, N.; Simó, R.; Barahona, M.J. Usefulness of Muscle Ultrasound to Study Sarcopenic Obesity: A Pilot Case-Control Study. J. Clin. Med. 2022, 11, 2886. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. Hida, T.; Ando, K.; Kobayashi, K.; Ito, K.; Tsushima, M.; Kobayakawa, T.; Morozumi, M.; Tanaka, S.; Machino, M.; Ota, K.; et al. Ultrasound measurement of thigh muscle thickness for assessment of sarcopenia. Nagoya J. Med. Sci. 2018, 80, 519–527. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  24. Kawai, H.; Kera, T.; Hirayama, R.; Hirano, H.; Fujiwara, Y.; Ihara, K.; Kojima, M.; Obuchi, S. Morphological and qualitative characteristics of the quadriceps muscle of community-dwelling older adults based on ultrasound imaging: Classification using latent class analysis. Aging Clin. Exp. Res. 2018, 30, 283–291. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. Wilson, D.V.; Moorey, H.; Stringer, H.; Sahbudin, I.; Filer, A.; Lord, J.M.; Sapey, E. Bilateral Anterior Thigh Thickness: A New Diagnostic Tool for the Identification of Low Muscle Mass? J. Am. Med. Dir. Assoc. 2019, 20, 1247–1253. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Souza, V.A.; Oliveira, D.; Cupolilo, E.N.; Miranda, C.S.; Colugnati, F.A.B.; Mansur, H.N.; Fernandes, N.M.D.S.; Bastos, M.G. Rectus femoris muscle mass evaluation by ultrasound: Facilitating sarcopenia diagnosis in pre-dialysis chronic kidney disease stages. Clinics 2018, 73, e392. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Welch, D.; Ndanyo, L.S.; Brown, S.; Agyapong-Badu, S.; Warner, M.; Stokes, M.; Samuel, D. Thigh muscle and subcutaneous tissue thickness measured using ultrasound imaging in older females living in extended care: A preliminary study. Aging Clin. Exp. Res. 2018, 30, 463–469. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Minetto, M.A.; Caresio, C.; Menapace, T.; Hajdareviv, A.; Marchini, A.; Molinari, F.; Maffiuletti, N.A. Ultrasound-based detection of low muscle mass for diagnosis of sarcopenia in older adults. PM&R 2016, 8, 453–462. [Google Scholar]
  29. Benaiges, D.; Goday, A.; Pedro-Botet, J.; Más, A.; Chillarón, J.J.; Flores-Le Roux, J.A. Bariatric surgery: To whom and when? Minerva Endocrinol. 2015, 40, 119–128. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
  30. Buchwald, H.; Avidor, Y.; Braunwald, E.; Jensen, M.D.; Pories, W.; Fahrbach, K.; Schoelles, K. Bariatric surgery: A systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA 2004, 292, 1724–1737. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. de Luis Román, D.; Garrachón Vallo, F.; Carretero Gómez, J.; Santabalbina, F.J.T.; Rolo, G.G.; Almeida, J.M.G.; Paris, A.S. La masa muscular disminuida en la diabetes de tipo 2. Una comorbilidad oculta que debemos tener en cuenta [Decreased muscle mass in type-2 diabetes. A hidden comorbidity to consider]. Nutr. Hosp. 2023, 40, 59–66. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Kalyani, R.R.; Corriere, M.; Ferrucci, L. Age-related and disease-related muscle loss: The effect of diabetes, obesity, and other diseases. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol. 2014, 2, 819–829. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Bozan, A.; Erhan, B. The relationship between quadriceps femoris thickness measured by US and femoral cartilage thickness in knee osteoarthritis, its effect on radiographic stage and clinical parameters: Comparison with healthy young population. J. Frailty Sarcopenia Falls 2023, 8, 155–162. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Jung, S.Y.; Kim, H.J.; Oh, K.T. Comparative Analysis of Preoperative and Postoperative Muscle Mass around Hip Joint by Computed Tomography in Patients with Hip Fracture. Hip Pelvis 2022, 34, 10–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Martínez, M.C.; Meli, E.F.; Candia, F.P.; Filippi, F.; Vilallonga, R.; Cordero, E.; Hernández, I.; Eguinoa, A.Z.; Burgos, R.; Vila, A.; et al. The Impact of Bariatric Surgery on the Muscle Mass in Patients with Obesity: 2-Year Follow-up. Obes. Surg. 2021, 32, 625–633. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  36. Haghighat, N.; Kazemi, A.; Asbaghi, O.; Jafarian, F.; Moeinvaziri, N.; Hosseini, B.; Amini, M. Long-term effect of bariatric surgery on body composition in patients with morbid obesity: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Clin. Nutr. 2021, 40, 1755–1766. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  37. Giraudo, C.; Cavaliere, A.; Lupi, A.; Guglielmi, G.; Quaia, E. Established paths and new avenues: A review of the main radiological techniques for investigating sarcopenia. Quant. Imaging Med. Surg. 2020, 10, 1602–1613. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Tosato, M.; Marzetti, E.; Cesari, M.; Savera, G.; Miller, R.R.; Bernabei, R.; Landi, F.; Calvani, R. Measurement of muscle mass in sarcopenia: From imaging to biochemical markers. Aging Clin. Exp. Res. 2017, 29, 19–27. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  39. Ikai, M.; Fukunaga, T. The size and strength per unit cross-sectional area of human muscle by means of ultrasonic measurement. Int. Z. Angew. Physiol. 1968, 26, 26–32. [Google Scholar]
  40. Young, A.; Stokes, M.; Crowe, M. The size and strength of the quadriceps muscles of old and young woman. Eur. J. Clin. Investig. 1984, 14, 282–287. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Ochi, M.; Tabara, Y.; Kido, T.; Uetani, E.; Ochi, N.; Igase, M.; Miki, T.; Kohara, K. Quadriceps sarcopenia and visceral obesity are risk factors for postural instability in the middle-aged to elderly population. Geriatr. Gerontol. Int. 2010, 10, 233–243. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Jcm 13 03763 g001
Figure 1. Measurement of subcutaneous tissue and thigh muscles using US. SF: subcutaneous fat; VI: vastus intermedius; RF: rectus femoris.
Figure 1. Measurement of subcutaneous tissue and thigh muscles using US. SF: subcutaneous fat; VI: vastus intermedius; RF: rectus femoris.
Jcm 13 03763 g001
Jcm 13 03763 g002
Figure 2. (a) A significant correlation was observed between RFT and HOMA-IR (r = 0.27, p = 0.02). (b) A significant correlation was observed between iFFM and HOMA-IR (r = 0.36, p = 0.001). (c) A significant correlation was observed between AMI and HOMA-IR (r = 0.31, p = 0.01). (d) A significant correlation was observed between handgrip strength and HOMA-IR (r = 0.26, p = 0.02).
Figure 2. (a) A significant correlation was observed between RFT and HOMA-IR (r = 0.27, p = 0.02). (b) A significant correlation was observed between iFFM and HOMA-IR (r = 0.36, p = 0.001). (c) A significant correlation was observed between AMI and HOMA-IR (r = 0.31, p = 0.01). (d) A significant correlation was observed between handgrip strength and HOMA-IR (r = 0.26, p = 0.02).
Jcm 13 03763 g002
Jcm 13 03763 g003
Figure 3. (a) A significant correlation was observed between RFT and iFFM (pre-surgery: r = 0.31, p = 0.01; post-surgery: r = 0.25, p = 0.05). (b) A significant correlation was observed between RFT and lower-extremity AMI post-surgery (pre-surgery: r = 0.15, p = 0.26; post-surgery: r = 0.27, p = 0.04). (c) A negative correlation was observed between QoL questionnaire and RFT results pre-surgery (r = −0.0018, p = 0.98), but a positive correlation was observed post-surgery (r = 0.23, p = 0.079).
Figure 3. (a) A significant correlation was observed between RFT and iFFM (pre-surgery: r = 0.31, p = 0.01; post-surgery: r = 0.25, p = 0.05). (b) A significant correlation was observed between RFT and lower-extremity AMI post-surgery (pre-surgery: r = 0.15, p = 0.26; post-surgery: r = 0.27, p = 0.04). (c) A negative correlation was observed between QoL questionnaire and RFT results pre-surgery (r = −0.0018, p = 0.98), but a positive correlation was observed post-surgery (r = 0.23, p = 0.079).
Jcm 13 03763 g003
Table 1. The baseline characteristics of the patients.
Table 1. The baseline characteristics of the patients.
Total sample size (n)77
Female (%)50 (64.9)
Age (years) mean ± SD53.2 ± 8.67
BMI * (kg/m2) mean ± SD43.82 ± 5.08
Type 2 DM (%)40 (51.9)
Type 1 DM (%)2 (2.59)
Prediabetes (%)9 (11.68)
Hypertension (%)50 (64.9)
Dyslipidaemia (%)42 (54.54)
* BMI: body mass index; DM: diabetes mellitus.
Table 2. Anthropometric parameters obtained by US, BIA and DEXA measurements.
Table 2. Anthropometric parameters obtained by US, BIA and DEXA measurements.
Pre-Surgery (Mean ± SD)Post-Surgery (Mean ± SD)p *
RFT (cm)1.05 ± 0.0670.77 ± 0.030.0002
iFFM (%)23.79 ± 0.3821.07 ± 0.590.001
AMI7.99 ± 0.187.16 ± 0.140.001
Lower-Extremity AMI6.02 ± 0.125.39 ± 0.110.001
RFT: rectus femoralis thickness; iFFM: fat-free mass index; AMI: appendicular muscle index. * p < 0.05 considered statistically significant.
Table 3. Results of the six patients for whom RFT and QoL increased.
Table 3. Results of the six patients for whom RFT and QoL increased.
PatientRFT *
Pre-Surgery (cm)		RFT
Post-Surgery (cm)		Increase in
RFT (cm)		QoL *
Pre-Surgery		QoL
Post-Surgery		Increase in QoL
70.460.71+0.25−21.5+3.5
190.630.7+0.07−1.251.75+3
280.640.96+0.32−0.252.75+3
410.860.89+0.03−10.75+1.75
421.61.73+0.13−0.252.25+2.5
601.021.13+0.11−2.52.25+4.75
* RFT: rectus femoral thickness; QoL: quality of life.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Simó-Servat, A.; Ibarra, M.; Libran, M.; Escobar, L.; Perea, V.; Quirós, C.; Puig-Jové, C.; Barahona, M.-J. Prospective Study to Evaluate Rectus Femoris Muscle Ultrasound for Body Composition Analysis in Patients Undergoing Bariatric Surgery. J. Clin. Med. 2024, 13, 3763. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm13133763

AMA Style

Simó-Servat A, Ibarra M, Libran M, Escobar L, Perea V, Quirós C, Puig-Jové C, Barahona M-J. Prospective Study to Evaluate Rectus Femoris Muscle Ultrasound for Body Composition Analysis in Patients Undergoing Bariatric Surgery. Journal of Clinical Medicine. 2024; 13(13):3763. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm13133763

Chicago/Turabian Style

Simó-Servat, Andreu, Montse Ibarra, Mireia Libran, Lilian Escobar, Verónica Perea, Carmen Quirós, Carlos Puig-Jové, and Maria-José Barahona. 2024. "Prospective Study to Evaluate Rectus Femoris Muscle Ultrasound for Body Composition Analysis in Patients Undergoing Bariatric Surgery" Journal of Clinical Medicine 13, no. 13: 3763. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm13133763

APA Style

Simó-Servat, A., Ibarra, M., Libran, M., Escobar, L., Perea, V., Quirós, C., Puig-Jové, C., & Barahona, M.-J. (2024). Prospective Study to Evaluate Rectus Femoris Muscle Ultrasound for Body Composition Analysis in Patients Undergoing Bariatric Surgery. Journal of Clinical Medicine, 13(13), 3763. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm13133763

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop