Open AccessMethodological considerations for and validation of the ultrasonographic determination of human skeletal muscle hypertrophy and atrophy
Author(s) -
Stokes Tanner,
Tripp Thomas R.,
Murphy Kevin,
Morton Robert W.,
Oikawa Sara Y.,
Lam Choi Hon,
McGrath Jessica,
McGlory Chris,
MacDonald Maureen J.,
Phillips Stuart M.
Publication year - 2021
Publication title -
physiological reports
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.918
H-Index - 39
ISSN - 2051-817X
DOI - 10.14814/phy2.14683
Subject(s) - muscle hypertrophy , magnetic resonance imaging , medicine , atrophy , ultrasonography , muscle atrophy , limits of agreement , gold standard (test) , thigh , skeletal muscle , nuclear medicine , radiology , anatomy
Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is the current gold standard for measuring changes in muscle size (cross‐sectional area [CSA] and volume) but can be cost‐prohibitive and resource‐intensive. We evaluated the validity of B‐mode ultrasonography (US) as a low‐cost alternative to MRI for measuring muscle hypertrophy and atrophy in response to resistance training and immobilization, respectively. Fourteen young men performed 10wk of unilateral resistance training (RT) to induce muscle hypertrophy. In the final two weeks of the 10wk, the subjects’ contralateral leg was immobilized (IMB). The cross‐sectional area of the vastus lateralis (VLCSA) was measured at the mid‐thigh before and after each intervention using MRI (VLCSA MRI ) and US (VLCSA US ). The relationship and agreement between methods were assessed. Reliability of US measurements ranged from good to excellent in all comparisons (ICC >0.67). VLCSA significantly increased after 10 weeks of RT (VLCSA US : 7.9 ± 3.8%; VLCSA MRI : 7.8 ± 4.5%) and decreased after 2 weeks of IMB (VLCSA US : −8.2%±5.8%; VLCSA MRI : −8.7 ± 6.1%). Significant correlations were identified between MRI and US at each time point measured (all r > 0.85) and, importantly, between MRI‐ and US‐derived changes in VLCSA. Bland‐Altman analysis revealed minimal bias in US measurements relative to the MRI (−0.5 ± 3.0%) and all measurements were within the upper and lower limits of agreement. Our data suggest that B‐mode ultrasonography can be a suitable alternative to MRI for measuring changes in muscle size in response to increased and decreased muscle loading in young men.