Next Article in Journal
Highly Sensitive Shack–Hartmann Wavefront Sensor: Application to Non-Transparent Tissue Mimic Imaging with Adaptive Light-Sheet Fluorescence Microscopy
Previous Article in Journal
Enhanced Light Sheet Elastic Scattering Microscopy by Using a Supercontinuum Laser
Open AccessTechnical Note

Validity of Ultrasound Imaging Versus Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Measuring Anterior Thigh Muscle, Subcutaneous Fat, and Fascia Thickness

1
Centre of Sensory Motor Interaction, Department of Health Science and Technology, School of Medicine, University of Aalborg, 9220 Aalborg, Denmark
2
PT, MSc, Private Practice, 61029 Urbino, Italy
3
School of Health Sciences, University of Southampton, Southampton SO17 1BJ, UK
4
Centre for Sport, Exercise and Osteoarthritis Research Versus Arthritis, Nottingham NG7 2UH, UK
5
School of Sport, Exercise and Rehabilitation Sciences, University of Birmingham, Edgbaston B15 2TT, UK
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Methods Protoc. 2019, 2(3), 58; https://doi.org/10.3390/mps2030058
Received: 27 April 2019 / Revised: 19 June 2019 / Accepted: 8 July 2019 / Published: 10 July 2019
  |  
PDF [2826 KB, uploaded 12 July 2019]
  |     |  

Abstract

The aim of the present study was to determine the validity of ultrasound (US) imaging versus magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for measuring anterior thigh muscle, subcutaneous adipose tissue (SAT), and fascia thickness. Twenty healthy, moderately active participants (aged 49.1 ± 9.74 (36–64) years), underwent imaging of the anterior thigh, using ultrasound and MRI modalities on the same day. Images were analyzed offline to assess the level of agreement between US and MRI measurements. Pearson’s correlation coefficient showed an excellent relationship between US imaging and MRI for measuring muscle (r = 0.99, p < 0.01), SAT (r = 0.99, p < 0.01), and non-contractile tissue (SAT combined with perimuscular fascia) thickness (r = 0.99, p < 0.01). Perimuscular fascia thickness measurement showed a poor correlation between modalities (r = 0.39, p < 0.01). Intra-class correlation coefficients (ICC3,1) also showed excellent correlation of the measurements with ICC = 0.99 for muscle thickness, SAT, and non-contractile tissue, but not for perimuscular fascia, which showed poor agreement ICC = 0.36. Bland and Altman plots demonstrated excellent agreement between US imaging and MRI measurements. Criterion validity was demonstrated for US imaging against MRI, for measuring thickness of muscle and SAT, but not perimuscular fascia alone on the anterior thigh. The US imaging technique is therefore applicable for research and clinical purposes for muscle and SAT. View Full-Text
Keywords: fascia thickness; MRI; muscle thickness; rectus femoris; ultrasound imaging; subcutaneous adipose tissue thickness; validity; vastus intermedius fascia thickness; MRI; muscle thickness; rectus femoris; ultrasound imaging; subcutaneous adipose tissue thickness; validity; vastus intermedius
Figures

Figure 1

This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited (CC BY 4.0).
SciFeed

Share & Cite This Article

MDPI and ACS Style

Mechelli, F.; Arendt-Nielsen, L.; Stokes, M.; Agyapong-Badu, S. Validity of Ultrasound Imaging Versus Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Measuring Anterior Thigh Muscle, Subcutaneous Fat, and Fascia Thickness. Methods Protoc. 2019, 2, 58.

Show more citation formats Show less citations formats

Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Article Access Statistics

1

Comments

[Return to top]
Methods Protoc. EISSN 2409-9279 Published by MDPI AG, Basel, Switzerland RSS E-Mail Table of Contents Alert
Back to Top