Cited by 47Nutrition and Health in AgingBody Composition Measurement TechniquesMuscle Physiology and Disorders

The role of muscle ultrasound to predict sarcopenia

Ozturk, Yelda, Koca, Meltem, Burkuk, Suna, Unsal, Pelin, Dikmeer, Ayse, Oytun, Merve Guner, Bas, Arzu Okyar, Kahyaoglu, Zeynep +6 more·2022·Nutrition

Abstract

Objectives This study aimed to provide data about the role of muscle ultrasound (US) to predict sarcopenia. Methods A total of 313 geriatric outpatients (age ≥65 y) were enrolled in the study. After a comprehensive geriatric assessment, anthropometric measurement and handgrip strength (HGS) data were obtained and a bioelectrical impedance analysis was performed. Sarcopenia was diagnosed using HGS and bioelectrical impedance analysis data. Gastrocnemius medialis (GC), rectus femoris (RF), and rectus abdominis (RA) muscle thickness as well as the RF cross-sectional area (CSA) were measured with US. The role of muscle US to predict sarcopenia was defined with a receiver operating characteristics analysis. Results The prevalence of probable and confirmed sarcopenia were 43.8% (n = 137) and 13.4% (n = 42), respectively. All muscle US parameters had positive correlations with both HGS and the fat-free mass index. There were inverse correlations between all muscle US parameters and the five-item sarcopenia questionnaire. The RF CSA had stronger correlations with the five-item sarcopenia questionnaire, HGS, and the fat-free mass index than others. The values of GC, RF, and RA muscle thickness and the RF CSA to predict sarcopenia for women/men were 13.9/13.8 mm (area under the curve [AUC]: 0.817/0.707 mm), 13/15.5 mm (AUC: 0.760/0.736 mm), 4.3/5.2 cm 2 (AUC: 0.766/0.773 cm 2 ), and 6.6/7.0 mm (AUC: 0.740/0.688 mm), respectively. Conclusions GC, RF, and RA muscle thickness and the RF C…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.nut.2022.111692

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Muscle ultrasound (MU) has proven to be an effective tool for diagnosing and monitoring sarcopenia, particularly in older adults and hospitalized patients.

    “It has proven to be an effective tool for diagnosing and monitoring sarcopenia, particularly in older adults and hospitalized patients [15].”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Ozturk, Y., Koca, M., Burkuk, S., Unsal, P., Dikmeer, A., Oytun, M. G., Bas, A. O., Kahyaoglu, Z., Deniz, O., Coteli, S., Ileri, I., Dogu, B. B., Cankurtaran, M., & Halil, M.
Affiliations
Hacettepe University (TR)
Venue
Nutrition
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2022-09
Volume
101
Pages
111692
ISSN
0899-9007 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4224294955
Cited by
47
References
2
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 2
FWCI
6.03
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Nutrition (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Nutrition and Health in Aging
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Body Composition Measurement Techniques
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Muscle Physiology and Disorders
Keywords
sarcopenia, muscle ultrasound, sarcopenia prediction, geriatric outpatients, grip strength, bioelectrical impedance analysis, fat-free mass index, rectus femoris cross-sectional area, muscle thickness, sex differences
MeSH terms
Aged, Female, Humans, Male, Ultrasonography, Muscle, Skeletal, Hand Strength, Quadriceps Muscle, Muscle Strength, Sarcopenia

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review