Cargando…

Factors of Muscle Quality and Determinants of Muscle Strength: A Systematic Literature Review

Muscle quality defined as the ratio of muscle strength to muscle mass disregards underlying factors which influence muscle strength. The aim of this review was to investigate the relationship of phase angle (PhA), echo intensity (EI), muscular adipose tissue (MAT), muscle fiber type, fascicle pennat...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Kuschel, Luciano Bruno, Sonnenburg, Dominik, Engel, Tilman
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9601777/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36292384
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/healthcare10101937
_version_ 1784817149975461888
author Kuschel, Luciano Bruno
Sonnenburg, Dominik
Engel, Tilman
author_facet Kuschel, Luciano Bruno
Sonnenburg, Dominik
Engel, Tilman
author_sort Kuschel, Luciano Bruno
collection PubMed
description Muscle quality defined as the ratio of muscle strength to muscle mass disregards underlying factors which influence muscle strength. The aim of this review was to investigate the relationship of phase angle (PhA), echo intensity (EI), muscular adipose tissue (MAT), muscle fiber type, fascicle pennation angle (θf), fascicle length (lf), muscle oxidative capacity, insulin sensitivity (IS), neuromuscular activation, and motor unit to muscle strength. PubMed search was performed in 2021. The inclusion criteria were: (i) original research, (ii) human participants, (iii) adults (≥18 years). Exclusion criteria were: (i) no full-text, (ii) non-English or -German language, (iii) pathologies. Forty-one studies were identified. Nine studies found a weak–moderate negative (range r: [−0.26]–[−0.656], p < 0.05) correlation between muscle strength and EI. Four studies found a weak–moderate positive correlation (range r: 0.177–0.696, p < 0.05) between muscle strength and PhA. Two studies found a moderate-strong negative correlation (range r: [−0.446]–[−0.87], p < 0.05) between muscle strength and MAT. Two studies found a weak-strong positive correlation (range r: 0.28–0.907, p < 0.05) between θf and muscle strength. Muscle oxidative capacity was found to be a predictor of muscle strength. This review highlights that the current definition of muscle quality should be expanded upon as to encompass all possible factors of muscle quality.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9601777
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-96017772022-10-27 Factors of Muscle Quality and Determinants of Muscle Strength: A Systematic Literature Review Kuschel, Luciano Bruno Sonnenburg, Dominik Engel, Tilman Healthcare (Basel) Systematic Review Muscle quality defined as the ratio of muscle strength to muscle mass disregards underlying factors which influence muscle strength. The aim of this review was to investigate the relationship of phase angle (PhA), echo intensity (EI), muscular adipose tissue (MAT), muscle fiber type, fascicle pennation angle (θf), fascicle length (lf), muscle oxidative capacity, insulin sensitivity (IS), neuromuscular activation, and motor unit to muscle strength. PubMed search was performed in 2021. The inclusion criteria were: (i) original research, (ii) human participants, (iii) adults (≥18 years). Exclusion criteria were: (i) no full-text, (ii) non-English or -German language, (iii) pathologies. Forty-one studies were identified. Nine studies found a weak–moderate negative (range r: [−0.26]–[−0.656], p < 0.05) correlation between muscle strength and EI. Four studies found a weak–moderate positive correlation (range r: 0.177–0.696, p < 0.05) between muscle strength and PhA. Two studies found a moderate-strong negative correlation (range r: [−0.446]–[−0.87], p < 0.05) between muscle strength and MAT. Two studies found a weak-strong positive correlation (range r: 0.28–0.907, p < 0.05) between θf and muscle strength. Muscle oxidative capacity was found to be a predictor of muscle strength. This review highlights that the current definition of muscle quality should be expanded upon as to encompass all possible factors of muscle quality. MDPI 2022-10-03 /pmc/articles/PMC9601777/ /pubmed/36292384 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/healthcare10101937 Text en © 2022 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Systematic Review
Kuschel, Luciano Bruno
Sonnenburg, Dominik
Engel, Tilman
Factors of Muscle Quality and Determinants of Muscle Strength: A Systematic Literature Review
title Factors of Muscle Quality and Determinants of Muscle Strength: A Systematic Literature Review
title_full Factors of Muscle Quality and Determinants of Muscle Strength: A Systematic Literature Review
title_fullStr Factors of Muscle Quality and Determinants of Muscle Strength: A Systematic Literature Review
title_full_unstemmed Factors of Muscle Quality and Determinants of Muscle Strength: A Systematic Literature Review
title_short Factors of Muscle Quality and Determinants of Muscle Strength: A Systematic Literature Review
title_sort factors of muscle quality and determinants of muscle strength: a systematic literature review
topic Systematic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9601777/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36292384
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/healthcare10101937
work_keys_str_mv AT kuschellucianobruno factorsofmusclequalityanddeterminantsofmusclestrengthasystematicliteraturereview
AT sonnenburgdominik factorsofmusclequalityanddeterminantsofmusclestrengthasystematicliteraturereview
AT engeltilman factorsofmusclequalityanddeterminantsofmusclestrengthasystematicliteraturereview