Cargando…

Panoramic ultrasound vs. MRI for the assessment of hamstrings cross-sectional area and volume in a large athletic cohort

We investigated the validity of panoramic ultrasound (US) compared to magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for the assessment of hamstrings cross-sectional area (CSA) and volume. Hamstrings CSA were acquired with US (by an expert operator) at four different sites of femur length (FL) in 85 youth competi...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Franchi, Martino V., Fitze, Daniel P., Hanimann, Jonas, Sarto, Fabio, Spörri, Jörg
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Nature Publishing Group UK 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7445237/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32839500
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-71123-6
_version_ 1783573947590115328
author Franchi, Martino V.
Fitze, Daniel P.
Hanimann, Jonas
Sarto, Fabio
Spörri, Jörg
author_facet Franchi, Martino V.
Fitze, Daniel P.
Hanimann, Jonas
Sarto, Fabio
Spörri, Jörg
author_sort Franchi, Martino V.
collection PubMed
description We investigated the validity of panoramic ultrasound (US) compared to magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for the assessment of hamstrings cross-sectional area (CSA) and volume. Hamstrings CSA were acquired with US (by an expert operator) at four different sites of femur length (FL) in 85 youth competitive alpine skiers (14.8 ± 0.5 years), and successively compared to corresponding scans obtained by MRI, analyzed by a trained vs. a novice rater. The agreement between techniques was assessed by Bland–Altman analyses. Statistical analysis was carried out using Pearson’s product moment correlation coefficient (r). US-derived CSA showed a very good agreement compared to MRI-based ones. The best sites were 40% FL (0 = mid patellar point) for biceps femoris long head (r = 0.9), 50% for semitendinosus (r = 0.9), and 30% for semimembranosus (r = 0.86) and biceps femoris short head (BFsh, r = 0.8). US-based vs. MRI-based hamstrings volume showed an r of 0.96. Poorer r values were observed for the novice compared to the trained rater, with the biggest difference observed for BFsh at 50% (r = 0.001 vs. r = 0.50, respectively) and semimembranosus at 60% (r = 0.23 vs. r = 0.42, respectively). Panoramic US provides valid CSA values and volume estimations compared to MRI. To ensure optimal US-vs.-MRI agreement, raters should preferably possess previous experience in imaging-based analyses.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7445237
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Nature Publishing Group UK
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-74452372020-08-26 Panoramic ultrasound vs. MRI for the assessment of hamstrings cross-sectional area and volume in a large athletic cohort Franchi, Martino V. Fitze, Daniel P. Hanimann, Jonas Sarto, Fabio Spörri, Jörg Sci Rep Article We investigated the validity of panoramic ultrasound (US) compared to magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for the assessment of hamstrings cross-sectional area (CSA) and volume. Hamstrings CSA were acquired with US (by an expert operator) at four different sites of femur length (FL) in 85 youth competitive alpine skiers (14.8 ± 0.5 years), and successively compared to corresponding scans obtained by MRI, analyzed by a trained vs. a novice rater. The agreement between techniques was assessed by Bland–Altman analyses. Statistical analysis was carried out using Pearson’s product moment correlation coefficient (r). US-derived CSA showed a very good agreement compared to MRI-based ones. The best sites were 40% FL (0 = mid patellar point) for biceps femoris long head (r = 0.9), 50% for semitendinosus (r = 0.9), and 30% for semimembranosus (r = 0.86) and biceps femoris short head (BFsh, r = 0.8). US-based vs. MRI-based hamstrings volume showed an r of 0.96. Poorer r values were observed for the novice compared to the trained rater, with the biggest difference observed for BFsh at 50% (r = 0.001 vs. r = 0.50, respectively) and semimembranosus at 60% (r = 0.23 vs. r = 0.42, respectively). Panoramic US provides valid CSA values and volume estimations compared to MRI. To ensure optimal US-vs.-MRI agreement, raters should preferably possess previous experience in imaging-based analyses. Nature Publishing Group UK 2020-08-24 /pmc/articles/PMC7445237/ /pubmed/32839500 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-71123-6 Text en © The Author(s) 2020 Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
spellingShingle Article
Franchi, Martino V.
Fitze, Daniel P.
Hanimann, Jonas
Sarto, Fabio
Spörri, Jörg
Panoramic ultrasound vs. MRI for the assessment of hamstrings cross-sectional area and volume in a large athletic cohort
title Panoramic ultrasound vs. MRI for the assessment of hamstrings cross-sectional area and volume in a large athletic cohort
title_full Panoramic ultrasound vs. MRI for the assessment of hamstrings cross-sectional area and volume in a large athletic cohort
title_fullStr Panoramic ultrasound vs. MRI for the assessment of hamstrings cross-sectional area and volume in a large athletic cohort
title_full_unstemmed Panoramic ultrasound vs. MRI for the assessment of hamstrings cross-sectional area and volume in a large athletic cohort
title_short Panoramic ultrasound vs. MRI for the assessment of hamstrings cross-sectional area and volume in a large athletic cohort
title_sort panoramic ultrasound vs. mri for the assessment of hamstrings cross-sectional area and volume in a large athletic cohort
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7445237/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32839500
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-71123-6
work_keys_str_mv AT franchimartinov panoramicultrasoundvsmrifortheassessmentofhamstringscrosssectionalareaandvolumeinalargeathleticcohort
AT fitzedanielp panoramicultrasoundvsmrifortheassessmentofhamstringscrosssectionalareaandvolumeinalargeathleticcohort
AT hanimannjonas panoramicultrasoundvsmrifortheassessmentofhamstringscrosssectionalareaandvolumeinalargeathleticcohort
AT sartofabio panoramicultrasoundvsmrifortheassessmentofhamstringscrosssectionalareaandvolumeinalargeathleticcohort
AT sporrijorg panoramicultrasoundvsmrifortheassessmentofhamstringscrosssectionalareaandvolumeinalargeathleticcohort