Pitfalls in the measurement of muscle mass: a need for a reference standard

Buckinx F, Landi F, Cesari M, Fielding RA, Visser M, Engelke K, Maggi S, Dennison E, Al-Daghri NM, Allepaerts S, Bauer J, Bautmans I, Brandi ML, Bruyere O, Cederholm T, Cerreta F, Cherubini A, Cooper C, Cruz-Jentoft A, Mccloskey E, Dawson-Hughes B, Kaufman JM, Laslop A, Petermans J, Reginster JY, Rizzoli R, Robinson S, Rolland Y, Rueda R, Vellas B, Kanis JA (2018)

Publication Type: Journal article

Publication year: 2018

Journal

Book Volume: 9

Pages Range: 269-278

Journal Issue: 2

DOI: 10.1002/jcsm.12268

Abstract

BACKGROUND: All proposed definitions of sarcopenia include the measurement of muscle mass, but the techniques and threshold values used vary. Indeed, the literature does not establish consensus on the best technique for measuring lean body mass. Thus, the objective measurement of sarcopenia is hampered by limitations intrinsic to assessment tools. The aim of this study was to review the methods to assess muscle mass and to reach consensus on the development of a reference standard. METHODS: Literature reviews were performed by members of the European Society for Clinical and Economic Aspects of Osteoporosis and Osteoarthritis working group on frailty and sarcopenia. Face-to-face meetings were organized for the whole group to make amendments and discuss further recommendations. RESULTS: A wide range of techniques can be used to assess muscle mass. Cost, availability, and ease of use can determine whether the techniques are better suited to clinical practice or are more useful for research. No one technique subserves all requirements but dual energy X-ray absorptiometry could be considered as a reference standard (but not a gold standard) for measuring muscle lean body mass. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the feasibility, accuracy, safety, and low cost, dual energy X-ray absorptiometry can be considered as the reference standard for measuring muscle mass.

Authors with CRIS profile

Involved external institutions

Vrije Universiteit Brussel (VUB) Belgium (BE) University of Southampton United Kingdom (GB) University of Sheffield United Kingdom (GB) Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Liège (CHU Liège) Belgium (BE) Abbott Nutrition Research & Development (ANRD) Singapore (SG) Centre Hospitalier Universitaire (CHU) de Toulouse France (FR) Istituto Nazionale di Riposo e Cura per Anziani (IRCCS INRCA) Italy (IT) University Hospital Ghent Belgium (BE) Tufts University United States (USA) (US) Österreichische Agentur für Gesundheit und Ernährungssicherheit (AGES) Austria (AT) Carl von Ossietzky Universität Oldenburg Germany (DE) Catholic University of the Sacred Heart / Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore Italy (IT) University of Liège (ULg) / Université de Liège Belgium (BE) King Saud University (KSU) / جامعة الملك سعود‎‎ Saudi Arabia (SA) Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche (CNR) / National Research Council of Italy Italy (IT) Geneva University Hospitals / Hôpitaux universitaires de Genève (HUG) Switzerland (CH) Università degli Studi di Firenze / University of Florence Italy (IT) Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam (VU) / University Amsterdam Netherlands (NL) Hospital Universitario Ramón y Cajal Spain (ES)

How to cite

APA:

Buckinx, F., Landi, F., Cesari, M., Fielding, R.A., Visser, M., Engelke, K.,... Kanis, J.A. (2018). Pitfalls in the measurement of muscle mass: a need for a reference standard. Journal of Cachexia, Sarcopenia and Muscle, 9(2), 269-278. https://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jcsm.12268

MLA:

Buckinx, Fanny, et al. "Pitfalls in the measurement of muscle mass: a need for a reference standard." Journal of Cachexia, Sarcopenia and Muscle 9.2 (2018): 269-278.

BibTeX: Download