Comparison of CT and dual-energy DEXA using a modified trunk compartment in the measurement of abdominal fat

James T. Lane, Lynn R Mack, Joseph C. Anderson, Timothy Eisdell Moore, Judi M. Erickson, Timothy C. Ford, Julie A. Stoner, Jennifer Lynn Larsen

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

19 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

The quantification of abdominal fat is a marker of health risk. While dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) is easily applied, it measures overall fat, although abdominal fat may be a better indicator of health risk from obesity. We have evaluated whether a subcomponent of DEXA measurements correlates better with computed tomography (CT) for body fat than those traditionally used. Forty-seven healthy adults (22 M/25 F), aged 54.5 ± 15.8 yr (mean ± SD), with BMI of 27.1 ± 4.6 kg/m 2 participated in a cross-sectional study. Body fat was measured using abdominal CT and DEXA for total fat, trunk fat, and a modified trunk measurement that excludes the chest, termed "lower trunk," and compared. The coefficient of variation for DEXA measurements for trunk, lower trunk, and total body were 1.98, 3.12, and 0.85 %, respectively. Mean DEXA for percentage fat ranged from 31.7% to 34.1 % for trunk, lower trunk, and total body, compared to 54.2% for abdominal CT (p < 0.003 for each pairwise comparison). Lower trunk, whole trunk, and total body DEXA measurements were not different. Measurement of subcomponents of fat content by DEXA is not superior to whole body measurements and remains consistently lower than measurements by CT.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)295-299
Number of pages5
JournalEndocrine
Volume27
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - Aug 1 2005

Fingerprint

Abdominal Fat
Tomography
X-Rays
Fats
Adipose Tissue
Health
Thorax
Obesity
Cross-Sectional Studies

Keywords

  • DEXA
  • Fat
  • Insulin
  • Resistance
  • Visceral

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism
  • Endocrinology

Cite this

Comparison of CT and dual-energy DEXA using a modified trunk compartment in the measurement of abdominal fat. / Lane, James T.; Mack, Lynn R; Anderson, Joseph C.; Moore, Timothy Eisdell; Erickson, Judi M.; Ford, Timothy C.; Stoner, Julie A.; Larsen, Jennifer Lynn.

In: Endocrine, Vol. 27, No. 3, 01.08.2005, p. 295-299.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Lane, James T. ; Mack, Lynn R ; Anderson, Joseph C. ; Moore, Timothy Eisdell ; Erickson, Judi M. ; Ford, Timothy C. ; Stoner, Julie A. ; Larsen, Jennifer Lynn. / Comparison of CT and dual-energy DEXA using a modified trunk compartment in the measurement of abdominal fat. In: Endocrine. 2005 ; Vol. 27, No. 3. pp. 295-299.
@article{a013fee179a04a1c8bef67f50a732425,
title = "Comparison of CT and dual-energy DEXA using a modified trunk compartment in the measurement of abdominal fat",
abstract = "The quantification of abdominal fat is a marker of health risk. While dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) is easily applied, it measures overall fat, although abdominal fat may be a better indicator of health risk from obesity. We have evaluated whether a subcomponent of DEXA measurements correlates better with computed tomography (CT) for body fat than those traditionally used. Forty-seven healthy adults (22 M/25 F), aged 54.5 ± 15.8 yr (mean ± SD), with BMI of 27.1 ± 4.6 kg/m 2 participated in a cross-sectional study. Body fat was measured using abdominal CT and DEXA for total fat, trunk fat, and a modified trunk measurement that excludes the chest, termed {"}lower trunk,{"} and compared. The coefficient of variation for DEXA measurements for trunk, lower trunk, and total body were 1.98, 3.12, and 0.85 {\%}, respectively. Mean DEXA for percentage fat ranged from 31.7{\%} to 34.1 {\%} for trunk, lower trunk, and total body, compared to 54.2{\%} for abdominal CT (p < 0.003 for each pairwise comparison). Lower trunk, whole trunk, and total body DEXA measurements were not different. Measurement of subcomponents of fat content by DEXA is not superior to whole body measurements and remains consistently lower than measurements by CT.",
keywords = "DEXA, Fat, Insulin, Resistance, Visceral",
author = "Lane, {James T.} and Mack, {Lynn R} and Anderson, {Joseph C.} and Moore, {Timothy Eisdell} and Erickson, {Judi M.} and Ford, {Timothy C.} and Stoner, {Julie A.} and Larsen, {Jennifer Lynn}",
year = "2005",
month = "8",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1385/ENDO:27:3:295",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "27",
pages = "295--299",
journal = "Endocrine",
issn = "1355-008X",
publisher = "Humana Press",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Comparison of CT and dual-energy DEXA using a modified trunk compartment in the measurement of abdominal fat

AU - Lane, James T.

AU - Mack, Lynn R

AU - Anderson, Joseph C.

AU - Moore, Timothy Eisdell

AU - Erickson, Judi M.

AU - Ford, Timothy C.

AU - Stoner, Julie A.

AU - Larsen, Jennifer Lynn

PY - 2005/8/1

Y1 - 2005/8/1

N2 - The quantification of abdominal fat is a marker of health risk. While dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) is easily applied, it measures overall fat, although abdominal fat may be a better indicator of health risk from obesity. We have evaluated whether a subcomponent of DEXA measurements correlates better with computed tomography (CT) for body fat than those traditionally used. Forty-seven healthy adults (22 M/25 F), aged 54.5 ± 15.8 yr (mean ± SD), with BMI of 27.1 ± 4.6 kg/m 2 participated in a cross-sectional study. Body fat was measured using abdominal CT and DEXA for total fat, trunk fat, and a modified trunk measurement that excludes the chest, termed "lower trunk," and compared. The coefficient of variation for DEXA measurements for trunk, lower trunk, and total body were 1.98, 3.12, and 0.85 %, respectively. Mean DEXA for percentage fat ranged from 31.7% to 34.1 % for trunk, lower trunk, and total body, compared to 54.2% for abdominal CT (p < 0.003 for each pairwise comparison). Lower trunk, whole trunk, and total body DEXA measurements were not different. Measurement of subcomponents of fat content by DEXA is not superior to whole body measurements and remains consistently lower than measurements by CT.

AB - The quantification of abdominal fat is a marker of health risk. While dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) is easily applied, it measures overall fat, although abdominal fat may be a better indicator of health risk from obesity. We have evaluated whether a subcomponent of DEXA measurements correlates better with computed tomography (CT) for body fat than those traditionally used. Forty-seven healthy adults (22 M/25 F), aged 54.5 ± 15.8 yr (mean ± SD), with BMI of 27.1 ± 4.6 kg/m 2 participated in a cross-sectional study. Body fat was measured using abdominal CT and DEXA for total fat, trunk fat, and a modified trunk measurement that excludes the chest, termed "lower trunk," and compared. The coefficient of variation for DEXA measurements for trunk, lower trunk, and total body were 1.98, 3.12, and 0.85 %, respectively. Mean DEXA for percentage fat ranged from 31.7% to 34.1 % for trunk, lower trunk, and total body, compared to 54.2% for abdominal CT (p < 0.003 for each pairwise comparison). Lower trunk, whole trunk, and total body DEXA measurements were not different. Measurement of subcomponents of fat content by DEXA is not superior to whole body measurements and remains consistently lower than measurements by CT.

KW - DEXA

KW - Fat

KW - Insulin

KW - Resistance

KW - Visceral

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=26844515551&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=26844515551&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1385/ENDO:27:3:295

DO - 10.1385/ENDO:27:3:295

M3 - Article

C2 - 16230787

AN - SCOPUS:26844515551

VL - 27

SP - 295

EP - 299

JO - Endocrine

JF - Endocrine

SN - 1355-008X

IS - 3

ER -