Assessment of muscle mass using ultrasound with minimal versus maximal pressure compared with computed tomography in critically ill adult patients.


Journal

Australian critical care : official journal of the Confederation of Australian Critical Care Nurses
ISSN: 1036-7314
Titre abrégé: Aust Crit Care
Pays: Australia
ID NLM: 9207852

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
Jul 2021
Historique:
received: 27 05 2020
revised: 06 10 2020
accepted: 10 10 2020
pubmed: 29 11 2020
medline: 25 11 2021
entrez: 28 11 2020
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

Preserved skeletal muscle mass identified using computed tomography (CT) predicts improved outcomes from critical illness; however, CT imaging have few limitations such that it involves a radiation dose and transferring patients out of the intensive care unit. This study aimed to assess in critically ill patients the relationship between muscle mass estimates obtained using minimally invasive ultrasound techniques with both minimal and maximal pressure compared with CT images at the third lumber vertebra level. All patients were treated in a single Australian intensive care unit. Eligible patients had paired assessments, within a 72-h window, of muscle mass by ultrasound (quadriceps muscle layer thickness in centimetres, with maximal and minimal pressure) and CT axial cross-sectional area (cm Thirty-five patients [mean (standard deviation) age = 55 (16) years, median (interquartile range) body mass index = 27 (25-32) kg/m Ultrasound assessment of the quadriceps muscle using maximal pressure reasonably predicts the skeletal muscle at the third lumbar vertebra level of critically ill patients. However, there is substantial uncertainty within these regression estimates, and this may reduce the current utility of this technique as a minimally invasive surrogate for CT assessment of skeletal muscle mass.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
Preserved skeletal muscle mass identified using computed tomography (CT) predicts improved outcomes from critical illness; however, CT imaging have few limitations such that it involves a radiation dose and transferring patients out of the intensive care unit. This study aimed to assess in critically ill patients the relationship between muscle mass estimates obtained using minimally invasive ultrasound techniques with both minimal and maximal pressure compared with CT images at the third lumber vertebra level.
METHODS METHODS
All patients were treated in a single Australian intensive care unit. Eligible patients had paired assessments, within a 72-h window, of muscle mass by ultrasound (quadriceps muscle layer thickness in centimetres, with maximal and minimal pressure) and CT axial cross-sectional area (cm
RESULTS RESULTS
Thirty-five patients [mean (standard deviation) age = 55 (16) years, median (interquartile range) body mass index = 27 (25-32) kg/m
CONCLUSION CONCLUSIONS
Ultrasound assessment of the quadriceps muscle using maximal pressure reasonably predicts the skeletal muscle at the third lumbar vertebra level of critically ill patients. However, there is substantial uncertainty within these regression estimates, and this may reduce the current utility of this technique as a minimally invasive surrogate for CT assessment of skeletal muscle mass.

Identifiants

pubmed: 33246863
pii: S1036-7314(20)30315-5
doi: 10.1016/j.aucc.2020.10.008
pii:
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Pagination

303-310

Informations de copyright

Crown Copyright © 2020. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Auteurs

Kate Fetterplace (K)

Department of Allied Health (Clinical Nutrition), Royal Melbourne Hospital, Melbourne, Australia; Department of Medicine and Radiology, Melbourne Medical School, The University of Melbourne, Royal Melbourne Hospital, Parkville, Australia. Electronic address: Kate.Fetterplace@mh.org.au.

Lucy Corlette (L)

Department of Radiology, Royal Melbourne Hospital, Melbourne, Australia.

Yasmine Ali Abdelhamid (YA)

Department of Medicine and Radiology, Melbourne Medical School, The University of Melbourne, Royal Melbourne Hospital, Parkville, Australia; Department of Intensive Care, Royal Melbourne Hospital, Melbourne, Australia.

Jeffrey J Presneill (JJ)

Department of Medicine and Radiology, Melbourne Medical School, The University of Melbourne, Royal Melbourne Hospital, Parkville, Australia; Department of Intensive Care, Royal Melbourne Hospital, Melbourne, Australia.

Michael T Paris (MT)

Kinesiology, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Canada.

Damien Stella (D)

Department of Medicine and Radiology, Melbourne Medical School, The University of Melbourne, Royal Melbourne Hospital, Parkville, Australia; Department of Radiology, Royal Melbourne Hospital, Melbourne, Australia.

Marina Mourtzakis (M)

Kinesiology, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Canada.

Christopher MacIsaac (C)

Department of Medicine and Radiology, Melbourne Medical School, The University of Melbourne, Royal Melbourne Hospital, Parkville, Australia; Department of Intensive Care, Royal Melbourne Hospital, Melbourne, Australia.

Adam M Deane (AM)

Department of Medicine and Radiology, Melbourne Medical School, The University of Melbourne, Royal Melbourne Hospital, Parkville, Australia; Department of Intensive Care, Royal Melbourne Hospital, Melbourne, Australia.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH