Advertisement

Sonographic morphometry of abductor pollicis brevis: can direct contact yield images comparable with those obtained by the water bath technique?

  • Keitaro Fujino
  • Katsunori OhnoEmail author
  • Kenta Fujiwara
  • Atsushi Yokota
  • Masashi Neo
Original Article—Orthopedics
  • 22 Downloads

Abstract

Purpose

This study sought to compare ultrasound-guided measurements of the abductor pollicis brevis (APB) using the water bath technique (WBT) and the direct contact method (DM) and investigate whether the DM can reproduce the measurements that would be obtained with a non-contact method, such as the WBT.

Methods

The APB muscles of 80 hands (40 healthy adults) were measured. The WBT was performed in a plastic container filled with water. The probe was placed adjacent to the skin surface without contact. In the DM, sonographic images were obtained with the probe and skin separated by sufficient transmission gel. The muscle thickness and cross-sectional area (CSA) were calculated with both methods. All subjects were examined three times by two examiners to estimate the inter- and intra-observer reliability. Bland–Altman analysis was performed to examine the agreement between the methods.

Results

No significant differences in the thickness or CSA of the APB were found. The interclass correlation coefficients for the WBT and DM showed almost perfect intra- and inter-observer reliability (range 0.87–0.94). There was no systematic bias between the techniques in the Bland–Altman analysis.

Conclusion

Similar to the WBT, the DM provides measurements of the APB thickness and CSA without causing morphometric changes.

Keywords

Abductor pollicis brevis Carpal tunnel syndrome Ultrasound Water bath 

Notes

Acknowledgements

We thank Rebecca Jackson, PhD, from Edanz Group (www.edanzediting.com/ac) for editing a draft of this manuscript.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflicts of interest

The authors have no conflicts of interest with regard to the presented research.

Ethical approval

All procedures followed were in accordance with the ethical standards of the responsible committee on human experimentation (institutional and national) and with the Helsinki Declaration of 1964 and later versions.

References

  1. 1.
    Phalen GS. The carpal-tunnel syndrome. J Bone Jt Surg Am. 1966;48:211–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Jan SVS, Rooze M. Anatomical variations of the intrinsic muscles of the thumb. Anat Rec. 1994;238:131–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Cooney WP, Linscheid RL, An KN. Opposition of the thumb: an anatomic and biomechanical study of tendon transfers. J Hand Surg Am. 1984;9:777–86.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Brown RA, Gelberman RH, Seiler JG, et al. Carpal tunnel release. A prospective, randomised assessment of open and endoscopic methods. J Bone Jt Surg Am. 1993;76:1265–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Nagaoka M, Nagao S, Matsuzaki H. Endoscopic release for carpal tunnel syndrome accompanied by thenar muscle atrophy. Arthroscopy. 2004;20:848–50.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Simon NG, Ralph JW, Lomen-Hoerth C, et al. Quantitative ultrasound of denervated hand muscles. Muscle Nerve. 2015;52:221–30.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Mohseny B, Nijhuis TH, Hundepool CA, et al. Ultrasonographic quantification of intrinsic hand muscle cross-sectional area; reliability and validity for predicting muscle strength. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2015;96:845–53.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Lee H, Jee S, Park SH, Ahn SC, et al. Quantitative muscle ultarasonography in carpal tunnel syndrome. Ann Rehabil Med. 2016;40:1048–56.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Javadzadeh HR, Davoudi A, Davoudi F, et al. Diagnostic value of "bedside ultrasonography" and the "water bath technique" in distal forearm, wrist, and hand bone fractures. Emerg Radiol. 2014;21:1–4.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Krishnamurthy R, Yoo JH, Thapa M, Callahan MJ. Water-bath method for sonographic evaluation of superficial structures of the extremities in children. Pediatr Radiol. 2013;43:S41–47.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Gupta S, Michelsen-Jost H. Anatomy and function of the thenar muscles. Hand Clin. 2012;28:1–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kim JS, Seok HY, Kim BJ. The significance of muscle echo intensity on ultrasound for focal neuropathy: the median- to ulnar-innervated muscle echo intensity ratio in carpal tunnel syndrome. Clin Neurophysiol. 2016;127:880–5.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Zou KH, Tuncali K, Silverman SG. Correlation and simple lonear regression. Radiology. 2003;227:617–22.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Landis JR, Koch GG. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics. 1977;33:159–74.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Doornberg J, Lindenhovius A, Kloen P, et al. Two and three-dimensional computed tomography for the classification and management of distal humeral fractures. Evaluation of reliability and diagnostic accuracy. J Bone Jt Surg Am. 2006;88:1795–801.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Bland JM, Altman DG. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet. 1986;1:307–10.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Gruber L, Gruber H, Djurdjevic T, et al. Gender influence on clinical presentation and high-resolution ultrasound findings in primary carpal tunnel syndrome: do women only differ in incidence? J Med Ultrason. 2001;2016:413–20.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Arslan H, Yavuz A, İlgen F, et al. The efficiency of acoustic radiation force impulse (ARFI) elastography in the diagnosis and staging of carpal tunnel syndrome. J Med Ultrason. 2001;2018:453–9.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Ishida H, Watanabe S. Influence of inward pressure of the transducer on lateral abdominal muscle thickness during ultrasound imaging. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther. 2012;42:815–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Cartwright MS, Demar S, Griffin LP, et al. Validity and reliability of nerve and muscle ultrasound. Muscle Nerve. 2013;47:515–21.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    König N, Cassel M, Intziegianni K, et al. Inter-rater reliability and measurement error of sonographic muscle architecture assessments. J Ultrasound Med. 2014;33:769–77.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Casarotto RA, Adamowski JC, Fallopa F, et al. Coupling agents in therapeutic ultrasound: acoustic and thermal behavior. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2004;85:162–5.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Balmaseda MT Jr, Fatehi MT, Koozekanani SH, et al. Ultrasound therapy: a comparative study of different coupling media. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1986;67:147.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Potter K, Reed CJ, Green DJ, Hankey GJ, et al. Ultrasound setting significantly alter arterial lumen and wall thickness measurement. Cardiovasc Ultrasound. 2008.  https://doi.org/10.1186/1476-7120-6-6.PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Japan Society of Ultrasonics in Medicine 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Keitaro Fujino
    • 1
  • Katsunori Ohno
    • 1
    Email author
  • Kenta Fujiwara
    • 1
  • Atsushi Yokota
    • 1
  • Masashi Neo
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Orthopedic SurgeryOsaka Medical CollegeTakatsukiJapan

Personalised recommendations