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...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
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 |