European Journal of Applied Physiology

, Volume 119, Issue 7, pp 1673–1674 | Cite as

Response: Muscle strength and function rather than muscle mass in sarcopenia

  • Matthew J. LeesEmail author
  • Oliver J. Wilson
  • Karen Hind
  • Theocharis Ispoglou

Dear Editor,

The authors welcome the constructive comments from Kara et al. concerning our recent paper (Lees et al. 2019). Their primary observations relate to the absence of gender from our analyses, the clinical relevance of our regression models, and use of non-specific muscle quality (MQ) cut-points. In the first instance, it is imperative to point out that we do not disagree in principle with any of the points raised; however, we believe that we have either addressed or alluded to the related issues within the main manuscript.

The purpose of this pilot study was to highlight the importance of MQ as a conjunctive measure alongside established sarcopenia definitions. We agree with Kara et al. that reductions in muscle power and physical performance precede a decrease in muscle mass. This is why we included measures of upper and lower body strength alongside the assessment of muscle mass in our study design. Furthermore, we sought to investigate the utility of MQ given the recent...


Author contributions

ML wrote the initial manuscript. ML, OW, and TI revised the manuscript. All authors read and approved the manuscript.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.


  1. Cruz-Jentoft AJ, Bahat G, Bauer J, Boirie Y, Bruyère O, Cederholm T, Cooper C, Landi F, Rolland Y, Sayer AA, Schneider SM, Sieber CC, Topinkova E, Vandewoude M, Visser M, Zamboni M, Writing Group for the European Working Group on Sarcopenia in Older People 2 (EWGSOP2), The Extended Group for EWGSOP2 (2018) Sarcopenia: revised European consensus on definition and diagnosis. Age Ageing 48(1):16–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ibrahim K, May CR, Patel HP, Baxter M, Sayer AA, Roberts HCJBG (2018) Implementation of grip strength measurement in medicine for older people wards as part of routine admission assessment: identifying facilitators and barriers using a theory-led intervention. BMC Geriatr 18(1):79. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Lees MJ, Wilson OJ, Hind K, Ispoglou T (2019) Muscle quality as a complementary prognostic tool in conjunction with sarcopenia assessment in younger and older individuals. Eur J Appl Physiol 119(5):1171–1181. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Malone J, Guleria R, Craven C, Horton P, Järvinen H, Mayo J, O'Reilly G, Picano E, Remedios D, Le Heron J, Rehani M, Holmberg O, Czarwinski R (2012) Justification of diagnostic medical exposures: some practical issues. Report of an International Atomic Energy Agency Consultation. Br J Radiol 85(1013):523–538. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Musselman K, Brouwer B (2005) Gender-related differences in physical performance among seniors. J Aging Phys Act 13(3):239–253CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Newman AB, Haggerty CL, Goodpaster B, Harris T, Kritchevsky S, Nevitt M, Miles TP, Visser M, The Health A, Body C (2003) Strength and muscle quality in a well-functioning cohort of older adults: the Health, Aging and Body Composition Study. J Am Geriatr Soc 51(3):323–330. CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute for Sport, Physical Activity and LeisureLeeds Beckett UniversityLeedsUK
  2. 2.Department of Sport and Exercise SciencesDurham UniversityDurhamUK

Personalised recommendations