Comparison between two methods of bioelectrical impedance analyses for accuracy in measuring abdominal visceral fat area

J Diabetes Complications. 2016 Mar;30(2):343-9. doi: 10.1016/j.jdiacomp.2015.10.014. Epub 2015 Oct 24.

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.

Keywords: Comparison; Computed tomography; Dual bioelectrical impedance analysis; Segmental multifrequency bioimpedance analysis; Visceral fat area.

Publication types

  • Comparative Study
  • Evaluation Study

MeSH terms

  • Absorptiometry, Photon
  • Adult
  • Aged
  • Aged, 80 and over
  • Body Composition*
  • Body Mass Index
  • Electric Impedance
  • Female
  • Humans
  • Intra-Abdominal Fat / pathology*
  • Magnetic Resonance Imaging
  • Male
  • Middle Aged
  • Obesity / diagnosis*
  • Predictive Value of Tests
  • Reproducibility of Results
  • Tomography, X-Ray Computed
  • Young Adult