Björn Jensen1, Wiebke Braun2, Corinna Geisler2, Markus Both3, Kristin Klückmann1, Manfred J Müller2, Anja Bosy-Westphal4. 1. seca gmbh & co. kg, Hamburg, Germany. 2. Institut für Humanernährung und Lebensmittelkunde, Christian-Albrechts-Universität Kiel, Kiel, Germany. 3. Klinik für Diagnostische Radiologie, Universitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein, Kiel, Germany. 4. Institut für Humanernährung und Lebensmittelkunde, Christian-Albrechts-Universität Kiel, Kiel, Germany, abosyw@nutrition.uni-kiel.de.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: A high amount of adipose tissue limits the accuracy of methods for body composition analysis in obesity. OBJECTIVES: The aim was to quantify and explain differences in fat-free mass (FFM) (as an index of skeletal muscle mass, SMM) measured with bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA), dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA), air displacement plethysmography (ADP), and deuterium dilution in comparison to multicompartment models, and to improve the results of BIA for obese subjects. METHODS: In 175 healthy subjects (87 men and 88 women, BMI 20-43.3 kg/m2, 18-65 years), FFM measured by these methods was compared with results from a 3- (3C) and a 4-compartment (4C) model. FFM4C was compared with SMM measured by magnetic resonance imaging. RESULTS: BIA and DXA overestimated and ADP underestimated FFM in comparison to 3C and 4C models with increasing BMI (all p < 0.001). -Differences were largest for DXA. In obesity, BIA results were improved: valuecorrected = -valueuncorrected - a(BMI - 30 kg/m2), a = 0.256 for FFM and a = 0.298 for SMM. SMM accounts for 45% of FFM in women and 49% in men. CONCLUSIONS: In obesity, the use of FFM is limited by a systematic error of reference methods. In addition, SMM accounts for about 50% of FFM only. Corrected measurement of SMM by BIA can overcome these drawbacks.
BACKGROUND: A high amount of adipose tissue limits the accuracy of methods for body composition analysis in obesity. OBJECTIVES: The aim was to quantify and explain differences in fat-free mass (FFM) (as an index of skeletal muscle mass, SMM) measured with bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA), dual energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA), air displacement plethysmography (ADP), and deuterium dilution in comparison to multicompartment models, and to improve the results of BIA for obese subjects. METHODS: In 175 healthy subjects (87 men and 88 women, BMI 20-43.3 kg/m2, 18-65 years), FFM measured by these methods was compared with results from a 3- (3C) and a 4-compartment (4C) model. FFM4C was compared with SMM measured by magnetic resonance imaging. RESULTS:BIA and DXA overestimated and ADP underestimated FFM in comparison to 3C and 4C models with increasing BMI (all p < 0.001). -Differences were largest for DXA. In obesity, BIA results were improved: valuecorrected = -valueuncorrected - a(BMI - 30 kg/m2), a = 0.256 for FFM and a = 0.298 for SMM. SMM accounts for 45% of FFM in women and 49% in men. CONCLUSIONS: In obesity, the use of FFM is limited by a systematic error of reference methods. In addition, SMM accounts for about 50% of FFM only. Corrected measurement of SMM by BIA can overcome these drawbacks.
Authors: Lorenzo M Donini; Luca Busetto; Stephan C Bischoff; Tommy Cederholm; Maria D Ballesteros-Pomar; John A Batsis; Juergen M Bauer; Yves Boirie; Alfonso J Cruz-Jentoft; Dror Dicker; Stefano Frara; Gema Frühbeck; Laurence Genton; Yftach Gepner; Andrea Giustina; Maria Cristina Gonzalez; Ho-Seong Han; Steven B Heymsfield; Takashi Higashiguchi; Alessandro Laviano; Andrea Lenzi; Ibolya Nyulasi; Edda Parrinello; Eleonora Poggiogalle; Carla M Prado; Javier Salvador; Yves Rolland; Ferruccio Santini; Mireille J Serlie; Hanping Shi; Cornel C Sieber; Mario Siervo; Roberto Vettor; Dennis T Villareal; Dorothee Volkert; Jianchun Yu; Mauro Zamboni; Rocco Barazzoni Journal: Obes Facts Date: 2022-02-23 Impact factor: 4.807
Authors: M N LeCroy; S Hua; R C Kaplan; D Sotres-Alvarez; Q Qi; B Thyagarajan; L C Gallo; A Pirzada; M L Daviglus; N Schneiderman; G A Talavera; C R Isasi Journal: Diabetes Res Clin Pract Date: 2020-11-23 Impact factor: 5.602