The Diagnostic Value of Ultrasound of the Rectus Femoris for the diagnosis of Sarcopenia in adults: A systematic review.

Background & Aim: Sarcopenia is defined as a loss of muscle mass and function, which can be caused by normal ageing or factors such as physical inactivity. Severe health consequences caused by sarcopenia highlight the need for early identification. Computed Tomography (CT) imaging, often mentioned as the gold standard due to its accuracy, is costly and not routinely performed in daily clinical care. Ultrasound of the rectus femoris, however, is low in costs and easily accessible. The aim is to present the current and most recent literature regarding the diagnostic value of ultrasound measurements of the rectus femoris for the diagnosis of sarcopenia in adults.
Methods: The databases PubMed and Web of Science were used to search for studies comparing ultrasound of the rectus femoris with a reference test to diagnose sarcopenia in adults. The quality of the final eligible studies was assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies, version 2, tool (QUADAS-2).
Results: Six studies were included in this systematic review. The muscle thickness and cross-sectional area of the rectus femoris were assessed and compared with the reference tests CT, Dual-Energy X-ray Absorptiometry (DXA), and Bioelectrical Impedance Analysis (BIA). Half of the studies had a low risk of bias on all QUADAS-2 domains. Three studies reported statistical significant outcomes and diagnostic values ranging from 60 to 81% sensitivity and 51 to 94% specificity.
Conclusions: Ultrasound of the rectus femoris muscle to diagnose sarcopenia has been shown to be a promising method in multiple clinical populations. However, there were some limitations such as a high methodological heterogeneity. Future research should develop standardized protocols and determine clear cut-off values to allow for a better implementation of ultrasound in clinical practice.
Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare no conflict of interest. The funders had no role in the design of the study; in the collection, analyses or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript, or in the decision to publish the results.
(Copyright © 2022. Published by Elsevier Ltd.)