Kyeong Seon Park1, Dong-Hwa Lee1, JieEun Lee1, Yoon Ji Kim1, Kyong Yeun Jung2, Kyoung Min Kim1, Soo Heon Kwak3, Sung Hee Choi1, Kyong Soo Park3, Hak Chul Jang1, Soo Lim4. 1. Department of Internal Medicine, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seongnam, South Korea; Department of Internal Medicine, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea. 2. Department of Internal Medicine, College of Medicine Eulji University, Seoul, South Korea. 3. Department of Internal Medicine, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea. 4. Department of Internal Medicine, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seongnam, South Korea; Department of Internal Medicine, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea. Electronic address: limsoo@snu.ac.kr.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To compare the accuracy of abdominal visceral fat area (VFA) measurements between abdominal dual bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA) and whole-body BIA referenced to computed tomography (CT) measures. METHODS: Abdominal VFAs were measured in 102 individuals: 59 men and 43 women with a mean age of 44.2 ± 16.3 years (range 21 - 76), body mass index 23.9 ± 7.8 kg/m(2) (range 18 - 35) using a DUALSCAN HDS-2000 machine (dual abdominal BIA) and an InBody720 machine (whole-body BIA). The VFA values from each machine were compared with those from CT under various conditions. RESULTS: Mean abdominal VFAs were 116 ± 69 cm(2) by CT, 89 ± 47 cm(2) by dual abdominal BIA, and 84 ± 33 cm(2) by whole-body BIA. The former measure showed a higher correlation with the CT measure than the latter (r=0.89 vs. r=0.64, P<0.001). Both BIA methods tended to underestimate abdominal VFAs compared with CT scans when CT VFA was not small. The dual abdominal BIA had less bias than the whole-body BIA in the assessment of VFAs. The whole-body BIA was affected by subcutaneous fat area. CONCLUSIONS: Dual BIA was more accurate in assessing abdominal VFA than whole-body BIA.
OBJECTIVES: To compare the accuracy of abdominal visceral fat area (VFA) measurements between abdominal dual bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA) and whole-body BIA referenced to computed tomography (CT) measures. METHODS:Abdominal VFAs were measured in 102 individuals: 59 men and 43 women with a mean age of 44.2 ± 16.3 years (range 21 - 76), body mass index 23.9 ± 7.8 kg/m(2) (range 18 - 35) using a DUALSCAN HDS-2000 machine (dual abdominal BIA) and an InBody720 machine (whole-body BIA). The VFA values from each machine were compared with those from CT under various conditions. RESULTS: Mean abdominal VFAs were 116 ± 69 cm(2) by CT, 89 ± 47 cm(2) by dual abdominal BIA, and 84 ± 33 cm(2) by whole-body BIA. The former measure showed a higher correlation with the CT measure than the latter (r=0.89 vs. r=0.64, P<0.001). Both BIA methods tended to underestimate abdominal VFAs compared with CT scans when CT VFA was not small. The dual abdominal BIA had less bias than the whole-body BIA in the assessment of VFAs. The whole-body BIA was affected by subcutaneous fat area. CONCLUSIONS: Dual BIA was more accurate in assessing abdominal VFA than whole-body BIA.
Authors: Gabriel Cunha Beato; Michele Novais Ravelli; Alex Harley Crisp; Maria Rita Marques de Oliveira Journal: Obes Surg Date: 2019-01 Impact factor: 4.129
Authors: Rebecca Mortazavi; Maria Lalouni; Rebecca Grudin; Eva Serlachius; Carl Johan Sundberg; Jessica Norrbom; Ingrid Larsson; Emma Haglund; Andreas Ivarsson; Fabian Lenhard; Tina Cronqvist; Kristina Ingemarsson; Åsa Mårsell; Olof Rask; Håkan Jarbin Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2022-07-12 Impact factor: 3.006