MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2980578751 · doi:10.1016/j.clnu.2019.10.003

Computed tomography-based psoas skeletal muscle area and radiodensity are poor sentinels for whole L3 skeletal muscle values

2019· article· en· W2980578751 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Katie E. Rollins, A. Gopinath, Amir Awwad, Ian Macdonald, Dileep N. Lobo

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Nutrition · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicNutrition and Health in Aging
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMedical Research CouncilVersus ArthritisEuropean Society for Clinical Nutrition and Metabolism
KeywordsMedicineRadiodensityHounsfield scaleSkeletal muscleSarcopeniaPsoas MusclesNuclear medicineComputed tomographyRadiologyAnatomyRadiography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Computed tomography (CT)-based measurement of skeletal muscle cross-sectional area (CSA) and Hounsfield unit (HU) radiodensity are used to assess the presence of sarcopenia and myosteatosis, respectively. The validated CT-based technique involves analysis of skeletal muscle at the third lumbar vertebral (L3) level. Recently there has been increasing interest in the use of psoas muscle alone as a sentinel. However, this technique has not been extensively investigated or compared with the previous validated standard approach. METHODS: Portovenous phase CT images at the L3 level were identified retrospectively from a single institution in 150 patients who had non-emergency scans and were analysed by a single assessor using SliceOmatic software v5.0 (TomoVision, Canada). Manual segmentation based upon validated HU thresholds for skeletal muscle density was performed for all skeletal muscle, as well as the individual muscle groups. The muscle CSA and mean radiodensity of each group were compared against the whole L3 slice values. RESULTS: When compared with whole L3 slice CSA, anterior abdominal wall CSA had the strongest correlation (r = 0.9315, p < 0.0001) followed by paravertebral (r = 0.8948, p < 0.0001), then psoas muscle (r = 0.7041, p < 0.0001). The mean ± SD density of the psoas muscle (42 ± 8.4 HU) was significantly higher than the whole slice radiodensity (32.3 ± 9.5 HU, p < 0.0001), with paravertebral radiodensity being a more accurate estimation (34.5 ± 10.8 HU). There was a significant difference in the prevalence of myosteatosis when the density measured from the psoas was compared with that of the whole L3 skeletal muscle (27.7% vs. 66.0%, p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: Whole L3 slice CSA correlated positively with psoas muscle CSA but was subject to wide variability in results. Psoas muscle radiodensity was significantly greater than whole L3 slice density and resulted in underestimation of the prevalence of myosteatosis. Given the lack of equivalence from individual muscle groups, we recommend that further work be undertaken to investigate which muscle group, or indeed whether the gold standard of whole L3 skeletal muscle, provides the best correlation with clinical outcomes.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.060
GPT teacher head0.363
Teacher spread0.303 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations48
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical NutritionSame topicNutrition and Health in AgingFrench-language works237,207