PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
February 23, 2026European Journal of Sport Science1 citationsOpen Access

Ultrasound and MRI Are Not Interchangeable for Measuring Muscle Cross‐Sectional Area: Analysis of Reliability and Validity in 10 Lower Limb Muscles Considering Sex Differences

View Full Paper
YKYoko KunimasaRMRobin MacchiCNCaroline Nicol

Key Points

  • To assess the reliability and validity of ultrasound-based cross-sectional area measurements compared to MRI in lower limb muscles while considering sex differences.
  • Measured ultrasound and MRI cross-sectional areas for ten lower limb muscles in 12 males and 12 females twice, one day apart.
  • Evaluated reliability using intraclass correlation coefficients, standard error of measurement, and minimal detectable change.
  • Analyzed validity using Pearson correlation and Bland-Altman analysis.
  • Reliability of US-ACSA ranged from 0.992% to 0.999%, while MRI-ACSA ranged from 0.952% to 0.998%.
  • US-ACSA showed strong correlations with MRI-ACSA, ranging from r = 0.73 to 0.95.
  • A systematic underestimation of MRI values was identified with a relative bias between -11.5% and -23.7%.

Abstract

Ultrasound-based anatomical cross-sectional area (US-ACSA) measurement using extended-field-of-view (EFOV) imaging offers a practical alternative to magnetic resonance imaging (MRI-ASCA) measurements. Although its reliability and validity have previously been assessed, previous studies have focused only on a single or limited number of muscles with little attention to effects of muscle size and sex. This study was conducted in ten lower limb muscles of varying sizes in males and females in order to assess the reliability and validity of US-ACSA measurements using MRI as the gold standard method. Twelve males and twelve females participated in this study. US- and MRI-ACSA were measured twice, one day apart. Reliability was assessed using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC2,3), standard error of measurement (SEM) and minimal detectable change (MDC). Validity was examined using Pearson product-moment correlation and Bland-Altman analysis. A linear model was used to evaluate the effects of muscle size and sex. ICC2,3, SEM and MDC ranged from 0.992% to 0.999%, 0.50%-1.90% and 1.25%-5.36% for US-ACSA and from 0.952% to 0.998%, 0.90%-4.76% and 2.51%-13.19% for MRI-ACSA. US-ACSA showed strong correlations with MRI-ACSA (r = 0.73-0.95). A systematic underestimation of MRI values (relative bias: -11.5% to -23.7%) was identified, with no systematic effect of muscle size or sex. These findings suggest that US-ACSA measurements of lower limb muscles are highly reliable regardless of muscle size and sex. However, due to the large systematic bias, US- and MRI-based ACSAs measurements are not interchangeable.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Kunimasa et al. (2026) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/699ba0b872792ae9fd870ca1https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsc.70145
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper