Changes in muscle size via MRI and ultrasound: Are they equivalent?

Changes in muscle size via MRI and ultrasound: Are they equivalent? We read with great interest the recent study by Franchi et al which concluded that changes in muscle thickness measured via ultrasound tracked well with changes in anatomical cross‐sectional area measured via magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). While this is a very important study due to the widespread use of ultrasound in training studies, there may be a slightly more advantageous way to analyze the results. A correlation between the percentage change in muscle thickness and the percentage change in anatomical cross‐sectional area was computed, yielding a significant correlation (r = .69). This correlation appeared to be primarily driven by four limbs (likely from two individuals) detailing a major limitation with correlational analyses as they can be skewed by outliers and are reliant on sufficient variability in the data. We used a graph digitizer to estimate the values provided in the figure (Figure 4A of Franchi et al) and computed the exact same correlation (r = .69), which was negated when excluding the four limbs that responded to a much greater extent than the rest (r = .34; P = .236).An alternative analysis exists through equivalency testing to assess whether the two measurements were not too different from one another. While a traditional t test examines whether a 95% confidence http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Scandinavian Journal of Medicine & Science in Sports Wiley
Loading next page...
 
/lp/wiley/changes-in-muscle-size-via-mri-and-ultrasound-are-they-equivalent-vIM0ybLXxO
Publisher
Wiley Subscription Services, Inc., A Wiley Company
Copyright
Copyright © 2018 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd
ISSN
0905-7188
eISSN
1600-0838
D.O.I.
10.1111/sms.13011
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

We read with great interest the recent study by Franchi et al which concluded that changes in muscle thickness measured via ultrasound tracked well with changes in anatomical cross‐sectional area measured via magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). While this is a very important study due to the widespread use of ultrasound in training studies, there may be a slightly more advantageous way to analyze the results. A correlation between the percentage change in muscle thickness and the percentage change in anatomical cross‐sectional area was computed, yielding a significant correlation (r = .69). This correlation appeared to be primarily driven by four limbs (likely from two individuals) detailing a major limitation with correlational analyses as they can be skewed by outliers and are reliant on sufficient variability in the data. We used a graph digitizer to estimate the values provided in the figure (Figure 4A of Franchi et al) and computed the exact same correlation (r = .69), which was negated when excluding the four limbs that responded to a much greater extent than the rest (r = .34; P = .236).An alternative analysis exists through equivalency testing to assess whether the two measurements were not too different from one another. While a traditional t test examines whether a 95% confidence

Journal

Scandinavian Journal of Medicine & Science in SportsWiley

Published: Jan 1, 2018

There are no references for this article.

You’re reading a free preview. Subscribe to read the entire article.


DeepDyve is your
personal research library

It’s your single place to instantly
discover and read the research
that matters to you.

Enjoy affordable access to
over 18 million articles from more than
15,000 peer-reviewed journals.

All for just $49/month

Explore the DeepDyve Library

Search

Query the DeepDyve database, plus search all of PubMed and Google Scholar seamlessly

Organize

Save any article or search result from DeepDyve, PubMed, and Google Scholar... all in one place.

Access

Get unlimited, online access to over 18 million full-text articles from more than 15,000 scientific journals.

Your journals are on DeepDyve

Read from thousands of the leading scholarly journals from SpringerNature, Elsevier, Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford University Press and more.

All the latest content is available, no embargo periods.

See the journals in your area

DeepDyve

Freelancer

DeepDyve

Pro

Price

FREE

$49/month
$360/year

Save searches from
Google Scholar,
PubMed

Create lists to
organize your research

Export lists, citations

Read DeepDyve articles

Abstract access only

Unlimited access to over
18 million full-text articles

Print

20 pages / month

PDF Discount

20% off