Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35842654›Full record

ArticleBMC veterinary research2022

Appendicular skeletal muscle mass assessment in dogs: a scoping literature review.

Ah Young Kim, Lindsay Hochman Elam, Nicolaas Everhardus Lambrechts, Mo D Salman, Felix Michael Duerr

Open access · goldAbstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in BMC veterinary research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 17% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Ah Young KimColorado State University College of Veterinary Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, 300 W Drake Road, Fort Collins, CO, 80523, USA.
Lindsay Hochman ElamColorado State University College of Veterinary Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, 300 W Drake Road, Fort Collins, CO, 80523, USA.
Nicolaas Everhardus LambrechtsColorado State University College of Veterinary Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, 300 W Drake Road, Fort Collins, CO, 80523, USA.
Mo D SalmanColorado State University College of Veterinary Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, 300 W Drake Road, Fort Collins, CO, 80523, USA.
Felix Michael DuerrColorado State University College of Veterinary Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, 300 W Drake Road, Fort Collins, CO, 80523, USA. Felix.Duerr@colostate.edu.
Colorado State University · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMonitoring changes in appendicular skeletal muscle mass is frequently used as a surrogate marker for limb function. The primary objective of this study was to review scientific information related to the assessment of appendicular skeletal muscle mass in dogs. The secondary objective was to develop practical recommendations for serial evaluation of muscle mass.

methodsA scoping review was conducted with a systematic search of PubMed, Web of Science, CAB abstract, and Cochrane from inception to June 2021. The following modalities were included in the search: limb circumference, diagnostic ultrasound, computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, and dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry.

resultsA total of 62 articles that measured appendicular skeletal muscle mass in dogs were identified. Limb circumference (55 articles) was the most commonly used modality. Its reliability was investigated in five studies. Several factors, including measuring tape type, body position, joint angles, and the presence of hair coat, were reported as variables that can affect measurements. Diagnostic ultrasound (five articles) was validated in three articles, but there is scarce information about observer reliability and variables affecting the measurement. Computed tomography (four articles) and magnetic resonance imaging (one article) have been used to validate other modalities at a single time point rather than as a clinical tool for serial muscle mass monitoring. Dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (two articles) has been used to quantify specific skeletal muscle mass but was mainly used to evaluate body composition in dogs.

conclusionLimb circumference and ultrasound are likely the main modalities that will continue to be used for serial muscle mass measurement in the clinical setting unless a new technology is developed. The reliability of limb circumference is questionable. Several key factors, including measuring tape type, body position, joint angles, and coat clipping, need to be controlled to improve the reliability of limb circumference measurements. Ultrasound may provide a reasonable alternative, but further studies are required to evaluate the reliability of this modality and identify factors that influence ultrasound measurements.

Indexed as

Body CompositionMuscle, SkeletalAbsorptiometry, PhotonAnimalsDogsReproducibility of ResultsUltrasonographyAppendicular skeletal massDogsMuscle mass assessmentScoping reviewSkeletal muscle mass

Identifiers

PMID35842654
PMCPMC9288046
OpenAlexW4285588359

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.