4.4 Article

Assessment of contractile and noncontractile components in human skeletal muscle by magnetic resonance imaging

期刊

MUSCLE & NERVE
卷 25, 期 2, 页码 251-258

出版社

JOHN WILEY & SONS INC
DOI: 10.1002/mus.10031

关键词

image processing, computer-assisted; magnetic resonance imaging; muscle components; muscle, skeletal; reproducibility of results

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) technique for the assessment of contractile and noncontractile components of human skeletal muscle is described, and the inter-rater and intra-rater test-retest reliability for repeated measurements from the same MR image are examined. Twenty cross-sectional MR images from the right lower leg were obtained from 30 healthy young men and women (mean age 24.1 years, SD 3.3). The anatomical cross-sectional area (aCSA; cm(2)), the cross-sectional area of noncontractile components (Noncon; cm(2)), the contractile cross-sectional area (cCSA = aCSA minus Noncon; cm(2)), and the relative amount of Noncon (%), of the ankle dorsiflexor muscle compartment were determined for each slice using a computer-based image analysis system. Reliability for repeated measurements of the slice with the largest aCSA for the 30 subjects was analyzed by two raters on two different occasions. Inter-rater reliability on both occasions, assessed by the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), was excellent for cCSA (ICC3.1 = 0.99) and Noncon OCC3.1 > 0.82). Intra-rater (between occasions) reliability was excellent for the two raters for measurements of cCSA (ICC1.1 = 0.99) and Noncon (ICC1.1 > 0.94). Bland and Altman analyses did not identify any clinically relevant bias in the measurements. Method errors were acceptable: within subjects coefficients of variation (CV) was less than 1.8% for cCSA and less than 16.3% for Noncon. It is concluded that repeated measurements of contractile and noncontractile components of the ankle dorsiflexor muscle compartment, obtained from the same MR image, are highly reliable. (C) 2002 John Wiley Sons, Inc.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据