Cited by 1,522Body Composition Measurement TechniquesNutrition and Health in AgingMuscle Physiology and Disorders

Cadaver validation of skeletal muscle measurement by magnetic resonance imaging and computerized tomography

Mitsiopoulos, N., Baumgartner, R. N., Heymsfield, S. B., Lyons, W., Gallagher, D., Ross, R.·1998·Journal of Applied Physiology

Abstract

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and computerized tomography (CT) are promising reference methods for quantifying whole body and regional skeletal muscle mass. Earlier MRI and CT validation studies used data-acquisition techniques and data-analysis procedures now outdated, evaluated anatomic rather than adipose tissue-free skeletal muscle (ATFSM), studied only the relatively large thigh, or found unduly large estimation errors. The aim of the present study was to compare arm and leg ATFSM cross-sectional area estimates (cm2) by using standard MRI and CT acquisition and image-analysis methods with corresponding cadaver estimates. A second objective was to validate MRI and CT measurements of adipose tissue embedded within muscle (interstitial adipose tissue) and surrounding muscle (subcutaneous adipose tissue). ATFSM area (n = 119) by MRI [38.9 +/- 22.3 (SD) cm2], CT (39.7 +/- 22.8 cm2), and cadaver (39.5 +/- 23.0 cm2) were not different (P > 0.001), and both MRI and CT estimates of ATFSM were highly correlated with corresponding cadaver values [MRI: r = 0.99, SE of estimate (SEE) 3.9 cm2, P < 0.001; and CT: r = 0.99, SEE = 3.8 cm2, P < 0.001]. Similarly good results were observed between MRI- and CT-measured vs. cadaver-measured interstitial and subcutaneous adipose tissue. For MRI-ATFSM the intraobserver correlation for duplicate measurements in vivo was 0. 99 [SEE = 8.7 cm2 (2.9%), P < 0.001]. These findings strongly support the use of MRI and CT as reference methods for app…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1152/jappl.1998.85.1.115

Cites

3 of 3 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?

  • Pooling the spectrum of methods for knee extensor mass/size and strength was done due to their high validity and reliability minimizing selection bias.

    “We pooled the aforementioned spectrum of methods due to their high validity and reliability minimizing the selection bias (63–66).”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Mitsiopoulos, N., Baumgartner, R. N., Heymsfield, S. B., Lyons, W., Gallagher, D., & Ross, R.
Affiliations
  • Queen's University (CA)
  • University of New Mexico (US)
  • Columbia University (US)
Venue
Journal of Applied Physiology
Published
1998-07-01
Volume
85
Issue
1
Pages
115-122
ISSN
  • 0161-7567 (ISSN-L)
  • 8750-7587
  • 1522-1601
OpenAlex
W2161349877
Cited by
1,522
References
3
Citations by year
2026: 54 · 2025: 75 · 2024: 92 · 2023: 97 · 2022: 129 · 2021: 128 · 2020: 106 · 2019: 110 · 2018: 101 · 2017: 78 · 2016: 70 · 2015: 73 · 2014: 56 · 2013: 39 · 2012: 42
FWCI
6.33
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Applied Physiology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Body Composition Measurement Techniques
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Nutrition and Health in Aging
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Muscle Physiology and Disorders
Keywords
skeletal muscle mass, adipose tissue, subcutaneous adipose tissue, cross-sectional area, magnetic resonance imaging, computed tomography, cadaver validation, measurement error
MeSH terms
Adipose Tissue, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Body Composition, Cadaver, Humans, Image Processing, Computer-Assisted, Leg, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Middle Aged, Obesity, Tomography, X-Ray Computed, Reproducibility of Results, Muscle, Skeletal

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