Literature DB >> 8044196

A multicompartment body composition technique based on computerized tomography.

B Chowdhury1, L Sjöström, M Alpsten, J Kostanty, H Kvist, R Löfgren.   

Abstract

The objective of this study was to develop a body composition method based on computerized tomography (CT) which would make it possible to divide the body into multiple compartments at the tissue and organ level. Eight healthy males (21-42 years old) with BMIs ranging from 18.6 to 25.3 kg/m2 were used for the methodological development. Areas of tissues, organs and air/gas were measured in 28 cross-sectional scans having defined and identical positions in all examined subjects. The area determinations were performed with the following attenuation intervals (given in Hounsfield units, HU): air, gas and lungs: -1001 to -191 HU; adipose tissue (AT): -190 to -30 HU; all other soft tissues and organs: -29 to +151 HU; skeleton: 152 to 2500 HU. Various tissue and organ areas in the -29 to +151 HU interval were obtained by means of cursor circumscriptions, while area determinations in other intervals were based on the number of pixels fulfilling given attenuation criteria. Volumes of tissues, organs and gas were obtained from corresponding areas and the distances between the scans. The body was divided into 12 main volumes of tissues, organs and gas that could be further subdivided by region. The main volumes observed (in litres; mean +/- s.d.) were: skeleton (subdivisible into dense skeleton, red and yellow bone marrow): 8.7 +/- 0.9; skeletal muscle: 31.9 +/- 5.1; visceral AT (subdivisible into intra- and retroperitoneal, cardiac, other thoracic AT): 3.0 +/- 1.7; intra- and retroperitoneal organs other than AT: 4.6 +/- 0.8; gastrointestinal gas: 0.25 +/- 0.09; heart: 0.61 +/- 0.12; lungs and bronchial air: 5.1 +/- 1.1; other thoracic organs: 0.32 +/- 0.08; mammary glands: 0.001 +/- 0.004; CNS (subdivisible into brain and contents of spinal channel): 1.6 +/- 0.15; air in sinuses and trachea: 0.19 +/- 0.05; subcutaneous AT: 11.6 +/- 2.8; skin: 2.4 +/- 0.39. Precision errors as determined from double analyses of different tissue volumes ranged from 0.01 to 0.3 litres. For validation purposes, CT-estimated organ weights were obtained by multiplying organ volumes by their assumed densities. The sums of all organ weights were then compared with the measured body weights. The error calculated from the individual differences between these weights was 0.6 kg (0.85%). The multicompartmentation technique described has a high validity and reproducibility and is applicable over a wide range of medical fields which require body composition measurements at the tissue and organ level.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1994        PMID: 8044196

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord


  50 in total

1.  Whole body air displacement plethysmography compared with hydrodensitometry for body composition analysis.

Authors:  O Dewit; N J Fuller; M S Fewtrell; M Elia; J C Wells
Journal:  Arch Dis Child       Date:  2000-02       Impact factor: 3.791

2.  Usefulness of standardized uptake value normalized by individual CT-based lean body mass in application of PET response criteria in solid tumors (PERCIST).

Authors:  Atsushi Narita; Susumu Shiomi; Yutaka Katayama; Takashi Yamanaga; Hiromitsu Daisaki; Kazuo Hamada; Yasuyoshi Watanabe
Journal:  Radiol Phys Technol       Date:  2016-02-12

3.  Imaging skeletal muscle volume, density, and FDG uptake before and after induction therapy for non-small cell lung cancer.

Authors:  M D Goncalves; S Taylor; D F Halpenny; E Schwitzer; S Gandelman; J Jackson; A Lukose; A J Plodkowski; K S Tan; M Dunphy; L W Jones; R J Downey
Journal:  Clin Radiol       Date:  2018-01-06       Impact factor: 2.350

Review 4.  The metabolic syndrome.

Authors:  O Bosello; M Zamboni
Journal:  Eat Weight Disord       Date:  2002-06       Impact factor: 4.652

5.  Anthropometer3D: Automatic Multi-Slice Segmentation Software for the Measurement of Anthropometric Parameters from CT of PET/CT.

Authors:  Pierre Decazes; David Tonnelet; Pierre Vera; Isabelle Gardin
Journal:  J Digit Imaging       Date:  2019-04       Impact factor: 4.056

6.  Baseline abdominal lipid partitioning is associated with the metabolic response to bariatric surgery.

Authors:  Andrei Keidar; Liat Appelbaum; Chaya Schweiger; Karen Hershkop; Idit Matot; Naama Constantini; Jacob Sosna; Ram Weiss
Journal:  Obes Surg       Date:  2014-10       Impact factor: 4.129

7.  Liver fat percent is associated with metabolic risk factors and the metabolic syndrome in a high-risk vascular cohort.

Authors:  Michel R Hoenig; Gary Cowin; Raymond Buckley; Christine McHenery; Alan Coulthard
Journal:  Nutr Metab (Lond)       Date:  2010-06-16       Impact factor: 4.169

8.  MRI sagittal abdominal diameter is a stronger predictor of metabolic syndrome than visceral fat area or waist circumference in a high-risk vascular cohort.

Authors:  Michel R Hoenig
Journal:  Vasc Health Risk Manag       Date:  2010-08-09

9.  BMI changes during childhood and adolescence as predictors of amount of adult subcutaneous and visceral adipose tissue in men: the GOOD Study.

Authors:  Jenny M Kindblom; Mattias Lorentzon; Asa Hellqvist; Lars Lönn; John Brandberg; Staffan Nilsson; Ensio Norjavaara; Claes Ohlsson
Journal:  Diabetes       Date:  2009-01-23       Impact factor: 9.461

10.  Short-term dynamics and metabolic impact of abdominal fat depots after bariatric surgery.

Authors:  Ram Weiss; Liat Appelbaum; Chaya Schweiger; Idit Matot; Naama Constantini; Alon Idan; Noam Shussman; Jacob Sosna; Andrei Keidar
Journal:  Diabetes Care       Date:  2009-07-08       Impact factor: 17.152

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.