The 2-Point Method: A Quick, Accurate, and Repeatable Approach to Estimate Ultrasound-Derived Quadriceps Femoris Cross-Sectional Area

Purpose: To analyze the feasibility of the 2-point method for estimating ultrasound-derived quadriceps femoris cross-sectional area (QUADACSA). First, (1) the agreement between QUADACSA measured by panoramic ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) was studied, and thereafter, we examined 2 approaches of the 2-point method in terms of (2) estimation errors and (3) test-retest repeatability. Methods: Both thighs of 16 young men were analyzed. Ultrasound-QUADACSA versus MRI-QUADACSA comparison was conducted at 6 thigh lengths (20%-70% of the thigh length). Thereafter, ultrasound-QUADACSA corresponding to 30% and 60% (2-point30%-60%) or 20% and 70% (2-point20%-70%) were used to estimate QUADACSA of the remaining regions. Estimated QUADACSA resulting from both 2-point approaches was compared with the measured one. Finally, the test-retest repeatability was examined by comparing the errors generated on 2 separate estimations. Statistics included the standard error of measurement (SEM) expressed in absolute (in square centimeters) and relative terms (in percentage) as a coefficient of variation (CV), as well as the intraclass correlation cofficient (ICC) and bias. Results: An excellent agreement (ICC >= 0.980) and reduced errors (SEM <= 2.43 cm2) resulted from the ultrasound-QUADACSA versus MRI-QUADACSA comparison. Although estimation errors found were reduced (CV <= 7.50%), they proved to be lower and less biased for the 2-point30%-60%, especially at the central regions (SEM <= 2.01 cm2; bias <= 0.89 cm2). Similarly, repeatability analysis revealed lower test-retest errors for the 2-point30%-60% (CV <= 1.9%) than for the 2-point20%-70% (CV <= 4.6%). Conclusion: The 2-point method, especially that implemented using the 30% and 60% regions, represents an accurate and repeatable strategy to evaluate QUADACSA.

Automated summary

The study showed that the 2-point method, especially when implemented using the 30% and 60% regions, is accurate and repeatable for evaluating QUADACSA.