Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 29, 2025
Segmentation and Linear Measurement for Body Composition Analysis using Slice-O-Matic and Horos
Published on: March 21, 2021
The agreement of different techniques for muscle measurement in diagnosing sarcopenia: a systematic review and
Linghong Li1, Zhilin Xia1, Xueqing Zeng1
1Key Laboratory of Molecular Epidemiology of Hunan Province, School of Medicine, Hunan Normal University, Changsha, China.
Background:
The measurement or estimation of muscle mass plays an important role in the diagnosis of sarcopenia. Beside dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA), several modalities, including bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA), ultrasound (US), computed tomography (CT), and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), have helped to provide imaging or electrical biomarkers for muscle mass. This study was aimed at summarizing the diagnostic performance of different techniques on muscle assessment for sarcopenia.
Methods:
Studies on the assessment of muscle mass by different techniques (compared with DXA), published from inception to 12 October, 2023 were retrieved from 4 electronic databases: the Cochrane Library, Embase, PubMed, and Web of Science. The quality assessment of included studies was conducted using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies 2 (QUADAS-2). The sensitivity, specificity, Cohen's kappa coefficient (κ), and Pearson correlation coefficient (r) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were pooled and presented via forest plots. The area under the curve (AUC) with 95% CI was pooled and presented via summary receiver operating characteristic (sROC) curve.
Results:
A total of 28 studies involving 4,926 participants were included. Compared with DXA, the pooled sensitivity and specificity, AUC, and Cohen's κ were 0.79 (95% CI: 0.71-0.86, P<0.001), 0.95 (95% CI: 0.82-0.99, P<0.001), and 0.88 (95% CI: 0.85-0.90), and 0.61 (95% CI: 0.51-0.72) for BIA. The pooled r value between DXA and BIA or US or MRI was 0.94 (95% CI: 0.92-0.96, P<0.001), 0.69 (95% CI: 0.54-0.80, P<0.001), and 0.96 (95% CI: 0.95-0.97, P=0.21), respectively. No qualified original study in relation to CT was included.
Conclusions:
BIA, US, and MRI would provide acceptable diagnostic accuracy for sarcopenia by evaluating muscle mass in terms of sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, and their higher correlations with DXA. Further investigation is required to elucidate the value of CT in diagnosing sarcopenia.
