Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Validation of a simplified method for muscle volume assessment
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Validation of a simplified method for muscle volume assessment
Do you wish to request the book?
Validation of a simplified method for muscle volume assessment
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Validation of a simplified method for muscle volume assessment
2014
Overview
The present study investigated the validity of a simplified muscle volume assessment that uses only the maximum anatomical cross-sectional area (ACSAmax), the muscle length (LM) and a muscle-specific shape factor for muscle volume calculation (Albracht et al., 2008, J Biomech 41, 2211–2218). The validation on the example of the triceps surae (TS) muscles was conducted in two steps. First LM, ACSAmax, muscle volume and shape factor were calculated from magnet resonance image muscle reconstructions of the soleus (SO), gastrocnemius medialis (GM) and lateralis (GL) of a group of untrained individuals (n=13), endurance (n=9) and strength trained (n=10) athletes. Though there were significant differences in the muscle dimensions, the shape factors were similar across groups and were in average 0.497±0.026, 0.596±0.030, and 0.556±0.041 for the SO, GM and GL respectively. In a second step, the shape factors were applied to an independent recreationally active group (n=21) to compare the muscle volume assessed by the simplified method to the results from whole muscle reconstructions. There were no significant differences between the volumes assessed by the two methods. In conclusion, assessing TS muscle volume on the basis of the reported shape factors is valid across populations and the root mean square differences to whole muscle reconstruction of 7.9%, 4.8% and 8.3% for SO, GM and GL show that the simplified method is sensitive enough to detect changes in muscle volume in the context of degeneration, atrophy or hypertrophy.
Publisher
Elsevier Ltd,Elsevier Limited
Subject
/ Athletes
/ Humans
/ Male
/ MRI
/ Muscle, Skeletal - physiology
/ Muscles
/ NMR
/ Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation
/ Studies
