PTPilotJournal of physical therapy science2017

Applicability of ultrasonography for evaluating trunk muscle size: a pilot study.

Michio Wachi, Tadashi Suga, Takatoshi Higuchi and 5 others

PMID 28265150

WHAT IT FOUND

In 24 healthy young men, ultrasound measured trunk muscle thickness closely matched MRI thickness, but matched MRI muscle area less well.

Ultrasound may be a practical alternative when MRI is not feasible.

Key findings

01In 24 healthy young men, ultrasound measured trunk muscle thickness at all 10 sites tracked closely with MRI measured trunk muscle thickness.

02Ultrasound measured thickness at all 10 sites also tracked with MRI measured cross-sectional area, but less strongly than it tracked MRI measured thickness, with relationships from 0.634 to 0.821.

03The ultrasound measurements were repeatable on two separate days at 10 trunk sites, with consistency scores from 0.919 to 0.970.

STILL TO COME

How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for PTs

Read the rest of this summary

You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.

Already have one?

What it does not show

The study was a pilot in 24 healthy young men, so it does not show what ultrasound would find in older adults, athletes, or patients with back pain. It measured relationships between two imaging methods, not whether ultrasound changes diagnosis, treatment, or patient outcomes. Ultrasound thickness tracked MRI cross-sectional area only moderately, with relationships from 0.634 to 0.821. The multifidus lumborum was measured prone with ultrasound and supine with MRI, which may have weakened the comparison. Reliability was tested in only 12 men over two days, not across different clinicians or patient groups.

The easy way to misread this

Do not conclude that ultrasound is a validated clinical substitute for MRI in trunk muscle assessment. The study was a pilot in 24 healthy young men, and ultrasound thickness only moderately tracked MRI cross-sectional area. It did not test patients or clinical outcomes.

Read it on PubMed →